The Equality Tribunal published 13 decisions recently under the Employment Equality Acts, 5 of which were successful in whole or in part. These are reviewed below beginning as always with the successful cases.


EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY DECISIONS UPHELD OR PART-UPHELD:


1. DEC-E2010 -009 An Employee -v- A Limited Company.

Ground/Issue: Race - Discriminatory Treatment - Discriminatory Dismissal.
Award: €9,000 for Discriminatory Dismissal.

The complainant was employed by the respondent as a General Operative between July, 2006 and January, 2007. He contended that during his period of employment he was treated less favourably as regards his conditions of employment and was dismissed by the respondent in circumstances amounting to discrimination on grounds of race (Lithuanian nationality) contrary to the Acts.

The complainant stated that he was approached by the Site Foreman (Mr. S) on the evening 18 January, 2007. He added that Mr. S told him "that tomorrow will be your last day as we want to keep work for the Irish". The complainant contended that work on the site was not due to finish until March, 2007 and in any event the respondent had other sites where he could have been relocated. He further contended that one of the Irish General Operatives, who had commenced employment with the respondent after him, was kept on and he (the complainant) was dismissed.

The respondent neither attended the Hearing nor was it represented at same. The Equality Officer awarded the complainant the sum of €9,000 by way of compensation for the distress suffered by him as a result of the discriminatory dismissal. The award included an amount of €5,600 in respect of loss of earnings and was subject to the PAYE/PRSI Code. The remainder was for the distress suffered by the complainant as a result of the discrimination and was not therefore subject to that Code.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2232


2. DEC-E2010-014 An Employee -v- A Limited Company.

Ground/Issue: Race - Discriminatory Treatment.
Award: €1,000 for Discrimination.

The complainant was employed by the respondent as a Security Operative between March, 2005 and April, 2007. He contended that during his period of employment he was treated less favourably as regards his conditions of employment on grounds of race (Lithuanian nationality) contrary to the Acts.

He succeeded on only one ground - the respondent's failure to provide him with either a contract of employment in a language he could understand or interpretation of his contract of employment (which was prepared in English) into a language he could understand. The Equality Officer awarded €1,000 for this discrimination
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2237


3. DEC-E2010-015 An Employee -v- An Employer

Ground/Issue: Family Status - Discriminatory Treatment - Discriminatory Dismissal - Harassment - Victimisation - Victimisatory Dismissal.
Award: €50,000 for Discrimination.

The claimant was employed at Lough Rynn Hotel as Sales and Marketing Manager in 2006. Following the appointment of a Group-level manager in mid-December 2006, who had responsibility for a number of hotels, she was required to change her duties and ultimately her employment was terminated in January 2007. The complainant was unable to comply with the new requirements and changes because of her family circumstances. The respondent denied that the changes, and the complainant's dismissal, were because of the complainant's family status and asserted that they were required for business reasons.

This is a detailed decision, which is worthy of attention: €50,000 by way of compensation for the distress suffered is a sizeable amount. In part, the Equality Officer's decision was based on assertions that the employer could not provide evidence to support, e.g.:

"...the job specification she was given (which was furnished to the Tribunal) is less specific in relation to the travel requirements - a fact which is extraordinary given the imperative described by the respondent and CG's desire to have this addressed. The imperative to have someone on the road increasing sales appears to have entirely dissipated immediately following the complainant's dismissal which renders questionable the respondent's reliance upon it as the reason for her dismissal.

"...The respondent has not presented any evidence that would support an assertion that the complainant refused to undertake, was unavailable to undertake, did not understand, or was not fully competent to undertake the role which was agreed at her recruitment. Nor was there evidence presented that might indicate that the complainant would not accept the conditions, as agreed at her recruitment, under which her duties were to be performed..."
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2238


4. DEC-E2010-018 An Employee -v- A Limited Company.

Ground/Issue: Gender - Discriminatory Treatment - Access to Employment.
Award: €12,697 for Discrimination.

The complainant submitted that in August 2007 she received a contract offering her a position as a Computer Analyst with the respondent. As she was only in Ireland on a tourist visa she returned to the Philippines to make the necessary work permit and visa arrangements. By March 2008 she had arranged her work permit and visa and then made arrangements to travel to Dublin in May 2008. In April 2008 she found out she was two months pregnant and informed the General Manager of the respondent on 24 April 2008.

She alleged that the General Manager advised her that they would not be proceeding with her employment because the "the disruption that would be caused by your situation would make it difficult to settle into your role".

The respondent argued that it was an "irregular" request over the Visa process and a waiver that caused him to withdraw the offer of employment.

The Equality Officer did not accept this explanation and awarded the complainant €12,697 in compensation for the discriminatory treatment suffered. This figure is the maximum award where a complainant was not in receipt of remuneration.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2241


5. DEC-E2010-019 An Employee -v- A Limited Company.

Ground/Issue: Gender - Discriminatory Treatment - Discriminatory Dismissal.
Award: €22,000 for Discrimination.

The complainant alleged she informed her manager that she was pregnant. She also told him that she was taking antibiotics and she had appointments at the hospital on Tuesdays for the following two weeks, following an illness. They had a discussion about maternity leave and the complainant said that she was only just pregnant and would not be seeking maternity leave for a while. She said that Mr. Boylan [her manager] said that the company does not "do maternity leave" and he would have to let her go. She asked why she was being let go and he said that there was no job for her and the company does not give maternity leave.

The manager denied the allegations and said the employee resigned.

The equality Officer preferred the evidence of the employee and awarded €22,000; half the maximum award in this case.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2242


EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY DECISIONS NOT UPHELD:


6. DEC-E2010-008 An Employee -v- A Limited Company.

Ground/Issue: Disability - Discriminatory Dismissal - Reasonable Accommodation.

The claimant had an accident at work and damaged his ankle and alleged that he was discriminated against because of the resultant disability. The Equality Officer gave scant regard to the employee's arguments that he was disabled:

"With regard to counsel's argument that the 5mm scar on his client's ankle constitutes a disfigurement, I do not accept that such a small scar in a place like someone's ankle is a disfigurement that engages the protection of the Acts. To follow counsel's argument would mean, to give just one example, that anybody who has ever undergone an appendectomy would gain lifetime status as a disabled person within the meaning of the Acts on the notion that the appendectomy scar is a disfigurement."
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2231


7. DEC-E2010-010 An Employee -v- A Limited Company.

Ground/Issue: Race - Discriminatory Treatment - Discriminatory Dismissal - Harassment - Victimisatory Dismissal.

The claimant failed to turn up and the case was dismissed.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2233


8. DEC-E2010-011 An Employee -v- An Employer.

Ground/Issue: Race - Discriminatory Treatment - Harassment - Victimisation.

The complainant specified that he was regularly called demeaning names. However, the terms he specified in his evidence had no connection to his nationality, or any of the other protected grounds and his claim fell.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2234


9. DEC-E2010-012 An Employee -v- A Limited Company.

Ground/ Issue: Race - Discriminatory Treatment - Discriminatory Dismissal - Harassment.

The complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of less favourable treatment in connection with his redundancy on the ground of his nationality, and requests for information put to the respondent were too vague for the Equality Officer to utilise the provisions of S. 81 of the Acts (in relation to drawing inferences) in favour of the complainant.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2235


10. DEC-E2010-013 An Employee -v- A Limited Company.

Ground/Issue: Race - Discriminatory Treatment - Discriminatory Dismissal - Harassment.

The claimant failed to turn up and the case was dismissed.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2236


11. DEC-E2010-016 29 Named Complainants -v- The Courts Service.

Ground/Issue: Gender - Equal Pay.

The complainants are employed by the respondent as Court Messengers at various locations (Courthouses) throughout the country. The named comparators are engaged as Staff Officers at similar locations.

The Equality Officer found that the none of the complainants are engaged on "like work" with the named comparators in terms of section 7(1)(c) of the Act and the complainants are not therefore entitled to the same rate of remuneration as that paid by the respondent to those comparators.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2239


12. DEC-E2010-017 An Employee -v- A Limited Company.

Ground/Issue: Gender - Disability - Marital Status - Discriminatory Treatment - Harassment - Sexual Harrassment - Victimisation.

The complainant started work for the respondent on 5 June 2001 and gave evidence that on her return to work in October 2001, after a period of sick leave (she had been mugged in Amsterdam whilst on a work-related trip), she suffered from a series of discriminatory acts that she claims amounted to discrimination in relation to promotion, training, conditions of employment and that she was harassed and sexually harassed. She submits that these acts continued until October 2006 when she was forced to go on sick leave, from which she never returned to work.

The respondent provided reasonable explanations for every difference in treatment between the complainant and comparators and the claim failed.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2240


13. DEC-E2010-020 An Employee -v- A Limited Company.

Ground/Issue: Family Status - Discriminatory Treatment - Victimisation.

The complainant submitted that she was employed by the respondent as a Stoma care nurse since August 1993. She submitted that at the initial interview she was asked if she intended getting pregnant in the near future, as the respondent couldn't employ someone who would. The complainant submitted that the respondent refused to pay her while she was on maternity leave. The complainant further submitted that when she returned from maternity leave in 2001 she was told that a full-time position no longer existed and that she could work part-time.

There were inconsistencies between the claimant's written and oral testimony and she failed to counter some of the respondent's evidence. Her claims fell.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2243