Agency worker’s claims of disability discrimination and employment law breaches failed because his illnesses did not meet the legal definition of disability and he had brought the claims against the wrong employer.

The Complainant worked as a general operative in the Respondent’s warehouse through the employment agency Staffline Recruitment Ireland Limited from December 2024 until his resignation in April 2025. He stated that although Staffline paid his wages, his day-to-day work was directed by managers employed by the Respondent. He alleged that he had been treated unfairly after taking sick leave and claimed that a message from the shift manager warning him that he might have to find another job if he called in sick again amounted to discrimination on the ground of disability. He further alleged that he was denied an opportunity to be recruited directly by the Respondent due to his sick leave record. The Complainant also contended that he had not been properly informed of changes to his terms of employment, that he had been forced to work overtime on one occasion, and that he had been penalised after complaining about this. Finally, he claimed he received insufficient statutory sick pay.

The Respondent argued that the complaints had been brought against the wrong legal entity. It maintained that the Complainant’s employer throughout the relevant period was the recruitment agency Staffline Recruitment Ireland Limited, which paid his wages, issued his assignment documentation and received his timesheets and medical certificates. The Respondent stated that the Complainant had never been interviewed or formally offered employment by the Respondent and had no contract of employment with it. Consequently, the Respondent submitted that it could not be liable under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994, the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997, or the Sick Leave Act 2022. In relation to the discrimination claim under the Employment Equality Acts, the Respondent argued that it had never been placed on notice that the Complainant had a disability and that the illnesses he reported were temporary and ordinary ailments. The Respondent also denied that the Complainant had been treated less favourably for taking sick leave or making complaints.

The Adjudicating Officer first considered the complaints brought under the Employment Equality Acts. Applying section 85A of the Acts, the officer held that the Complainant had failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination on the ground of disability. The illnesses relied upon by the Complainant, such as stomach upset, fever, headache and tiredness, were temporary and ordinary conditions and did not fall within the statutory definition of disability. As a result, the burden of proof did not shift to the Respondent. The Adjudication Officer then considered the remaining complaints under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994, the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 and the Sick Leave Act 2022. It was concluded that the Complainant had been employed by Staffline Recruitment Ireland Limited rather than by the Respondent warehouse operator. Since the Respondent was not the Complainant’s employer for the purposes of those statutes, the complaints had been made against the wrong Respondent and were therefore not well founded.

Employers should:                

• Clearly define any contractual relationship between an agency, the host company and workers. Written documentation should specify who the legal employer is, who is responsible for payroll, and which entity bears statutory obligations under employment legislation.  
   
  
• Ensure that managers and supervisors are trained in appropriate communication with agency staff. Informal remarks about sickness absence or job security may later be interpreted as discriminatory treatment. Even where a worker’s illness does not meet the statutory definition of disability, careless messaging or threats concerning attendance can create unnecessary legal disputes and reputational risks for the organisation. 
   
  
• Maintain clear procedures for handling grievances and complaints raised by agency workers operating within their workplaces. While the agency may remain the legal employer, host organisations should cooperate with agencies in investigating complaints, recording working hours accurately and ensuring compliance with statutory requirements regarding working time and sick leave.

The full case can be found here.