The Equality Authority has recently published another 15 employment equality decisions, 2 of which were upheld.

* Case 1 below involved a 'tactile' manager in an hotel and success of failure in relation to a decision of the Equality Officer boiled down to the quality of the witnesses. The EO preferred the evidence of the complainant, whose evidence and recall were much stronger after a particularly upsetting incident, which the EO found believable. There are some questions over the constructive dismissal element of the findings, however.
http://bit.ly/l2F8mV

* Case 2 was another harassment case. This case, where €10k was awarded for harassment, was characterised by what the EO found to be an unacceptable workplace culture: "... I am compelled to say, having carefully considered the evidence adduced by both parties at the Hearing, that the manner in which the complainant's working environment operated was one in which inappropriate language and behaviour, some of which had sexually offensive undertones, was a daily feature of working life."
http://bit.ly/lMTeQU

More on these below. None of the not-upheld decisions is of particular interest, consisting largely of cases where complaints either failed to establish a prima facie case or failed to turn up at the hearing.


EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY DECISIONS UPHELD OR PART-UPHELD:


1. DEC-E2011-096: A Receptionist -v- A Hotel. Grounds / Issues: Discriminatory Dismissal, Harassment, Sexual Harassment, Gender. Award: €30,000 for Sexual Harassment and Discriminatory Dismissal.

This case involved allegations of sexual harassment by a 'tactile' manager made by a hotel receptionist. She said that various comments built up over time and became less acceptable to the employee and came to a head when the manager tried to kiss the receptionist against her will. The manager and hotel denied the allegations.

As with many harassment cases, it boils down to who makes the best witness. In this case, according to the Equality Officer, the complainant was weak regarding incidents prior to the attempted kiss but much stronger as a witness about that incident:

"Having regard to the foregoing, I am not satisfied that the complainant has established in the first instance, facts from which discrimination may be inferred for the period prior to August 2008, in particular, her account of events that took place prior to that date lacked the level of detail I would have expected. When this is combined with her detached demeanour in evidence and in reply to cross-examination, I can come to no other conclusion. The totality of the complainant's evidence and demeanour can be contrasted quite starkly with her account of the incident of 3 August 2008. When giving evidence of this incident, the complainant recalled the details of the incident with such precision that, when combined with her demeanour, her account was utterly compelling. Her account of events was consistent, detailed and plausible and stood up to cross-examination. The complainant gave a similar level of detail in relation to the incident of 4 August 2008 and although two witnesses gave contrasting accounts of that day's incidents, I prefer the complainant's version of events."

The EO awarded €30,000 in compensation for the effects of the sexual harassment and discriminatory dismissal suffered. The alleged dismissal was a constructive one, where an employee is required to resign following an act of repudiation of contract by the employer. The employer said the complainant never formally resigned and never sought her P45 and the EO seems to back this up by referring to a complaint about harassment set out in a lawyer's letter of 22 August but pointing out no date for resignation or indication of same in the lawyer's letter. Nonetheless, he found in favour of the complainant and awarded €30k.
http://bit.ly/l2F8mV


2. DEC-E2011-099: An Employee -v- An Employer: Grounds / Issues: Gender, Discriminatory Treatment, Discriminatory Dismissal, Sexual Harassment, Victimisation. Award:€10,000 Sexual Harassment.

This is a similar case of sexual harassment and constructive dismissal, again from 2008, this time in February, so it has taken over 3 years to get a decision on this matter.

It is the normal practice of the Tribunal to offer the parties the option of anonymising the identities of the parties in circumstances where the complaint involves allegations of sexual harassment (as happened in the first case above). However, the complainant decided to forego this option and consequently the names of the parties are identified in this Decision. The names of witnesses are however, withheld in accordance with the general practice of the Tribunal.

The complainant stated that shortly after she commenced employment (in September 2006) with the respondent she was briefly absent from work with a chest infection. She added that on her return she answered the telephone to Mr. M - who is the person she alleged sexually harassed her. She stated that in the course of this conversation - which was the first occasion she spoke with him - Mr. M commented on her absence from work and when she explained she had suffered from a chest infection he told her he would like to rub Vicks into her chest. The complainant states that she felt uncomfortable with this comment and immediately terminated the telephone call.

Various incidents were alleged, sexual and otherwise, including changes to the email system, over the next year or more and the complainant became absent with stress. Complaints about poor workmanship were not levelled at equivalent male employees. The complainant stated that she remained on sick leave after 8 February, 2008 and submitted medical certificates to her employer covering the absence. She added that she heard nothing further from the respondent and felt she was being ignored. She stated that in the circumstances she considered the working relationship had totally collapsed and she was left with no other option but to resign and did so in writing on 25 February, 2008.

The evidence of the respondent witnesses seemed at best inconsistent. They denied matters and could not recall others but Ms L (the complainant's line manager) stated that she spoke with Mr. M at the time asking him "to go easy on the girls".

The complainant failed to establish a number of complaints but the allegation of sexual harassment was accepted and €10k was awarded. The EO was not impressed with the culture within the workplace:

"... I am compelled to say, having carefully considered the evidence adduced by both parties at the Hearing, that the manner in which the complainant's working environment operated was one in which inappropriate language and behaviour, some of which had sexually offensive undertones, was a daily feature of working life."
http://bit.ly/lMTeQU

EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY DECISIONS NOT UPHELD:

3. DEC-E2011-087: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Discrimination, Marital Status, Family Status, Race, Training, Conditions of Employment, Discriminatory Dismissal.

The complainant did not attend and the EO found against him.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-087-Full-Case-Report.html


4. DEC-E2011-088: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Race, Conditions of Employment, and Other.

This case involved a Spanish employee who was unable to build up enough evidence of discrimination. The respondent contended that the complainant had made no complaint to them until just before she went out on long term sick leave. When she made a formal complaint they used the procedures in their 'dignity and Respect Policy' and initiated an investigation. They further contended that it was not until they were advised that the complainant had submitted a claim to the Equality Tribunal that they became aware of any racial element to the complainant's concerns.

The complainant's husband gave evidence that when he rang HR on 16 May 2008 he did mention that his wife's problems were stemming from language difficulties which he contends was a clear indication that there was a racial element to her complainants. The respondent's note of that phone call which was sent to the HR Manager stated Mr Lowry said that "Teresa sometimes finds the language difficult as she is from Spain". This phone call was followed by two meetings between the complainant and the respondent which included accusations of bullying. These meetings culminated in the complainant's union representative writing to the HR Manager summarising the complainant's issues. This contained no reference to any of the comments from which it could be inferred there was a racial element and included no accusation that her complainants arose because of her race. The complainant contended they were encouraged to leave the racial element out by their union representative. Nonetheless, the claims fell.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-088-Full-Case-Report.html


5. DEC-E2011-089: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Race, Victimisatory Dismissal.

This case involved a foreign national who alleged victimisation race discrimination, having withdrawn other allegations. The EO did not find him credible and found the evidence of the respondent to be more credible.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-089-Full-Case-Report.html


6. DEC-E2011-090:An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Gender, Religion, Race, Discriminatory Dismissal, Harassment, Victimisation and Victimisatory Dismissal.

The complainant has dual Bosnian/Irish citizenship but his claim fell largely because he was dismissed at the same time as three others for redundancy reasons and could not make a causal link between his redundancy and his nationality.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-090-Full-Case-Report.html


7. DEC-E2011-091: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Less Favourable Treatment, Race, Access to Employment.

The complainant was unable to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and the complaints failed.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-091-Full-Case-Report.html


8. DEC-E2011-092: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Race, Conditions of Employment, Training, Dismissal, Working hours, Harassment.

The complainant was unable to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and the complaints failed.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-092-Full-Case-Report.html


9. DEC-E2011-093:A Receptionist -v- A Medical Consultant

Grounds / Issues: Dismissal, Less favourable treatment, Gender, Family Status, Race, Discriminatory Dismissal.

The complainant was unable to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and the complaints failed.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-093-Full-Case-Report.html


10. DEC-E2011-094: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Discriminatory Treatment, Discriminatory Dismissal, Race, Failure to Attend.

The complainant did not attend and the EO found against him.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-094-Full-Case-Report.html


11. DEC-E2011-095: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds/ Issues: Discriminatory Dismissal, Gender, Failure to Attend.

The complainant did not attend and the EO found against her.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-095-Full-Case-Report.html


12. DEC-E2011-097:An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Training, Discriminatory Dismissal, Conditions of Employment, Race, Failure to attend

The complainant did not attend and the EO found against him.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-097-Full-Case-Report.html


13. DEC-E2011-098: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Disability

The complainant did not attend and the EO found against her.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-098-Full-Case-Report.html


14. DEC-E2011-100:An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues : Discriminatory Treatment, Race, Conditions of Employment, Training, Discriminatory Dismissal.

The complainant was unable to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and the complaints failed.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-100-Full-Case-Report.html


15. DEC-E2011-101: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues : Discriminatory Treatment, Race, Conditions of Employment, Training, Discriminatory Dismissal, Victimisation.

The complainant was unable to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and the complaints failed.
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-101-Full-Case-Report.html