The Equality Tribunal yesterday published 19 Decisions taken under the Employment Equality Acts, just 6 of which were successful. These are reviewed below.

The largest award was €26988 for sexual harassment and another €26988 for victimisation and victimisatory dismissal plus interest in a rather disturbing case of sexual harassment of a female member of staff by a manager over a sustained period of time.


EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY DECISIONS UPHELD OR PART-UPHELD:


1. DEC-E2010 -189: A Complainant -v A Respondent and A Government Department

Grounds/Issues: Religion, Access to Employment, Discrimination.
Award: €12697 for Discriminatory Treatment.

This dispute concerned a claim by Ms McKeever that she was discriminated against by the Board of Management Knocktemple National School and the Minister for Education and Science on the grounds of religion contrary to section 6(2)(e) of the Employment Equality Acts in relation to access to employment in terms of section 8(1)(a) of the Acts.

The complainant submitted that in May 2007 she applied for a permanent teaching post in Knocktemple National School. She was interviewed on 26 May and in late May or early June she was told that she was unsuccessful. On 28 June 2007 she received a phone call from the Principal who told her the school had a new post and offered her a permanent post. The complainant submitted that she verbally accepted this offer. She received a letter dated 28 June 2007 from the Chair of the Board of Management confirming the appointment.

The complainant submitted that on 5 July 2007 she received a call from the Chair of the Board of Management as the local priest had asked her to check a few things. She was asked if she had a Catholic religious certificate. The complainant said she did not have a certificate but she was familiar with and willing to teach the Alive-O religious programme. She also told the chair she was a member of the Church of Ireland and the Chair said it should not be a problem as she would be teaching 4th class which was not involved in Communion or Confirmation.

The post was not confirmed and was re-advertised.

The reason offered by the respondent was that neither the Principal nor the Chair of the Board of Management had the authority to make such an offer to the complainant without permission of the Board of Management and this constituted "a fundamental breach of procedures" and therefore re-advertising the post was the "prudent" course of action.

The Equality Officer concluded that the Board of Management was influenced by the fact that the complainant did not have a Catholic Religious Certificate and awarded the maximum payment of €12,697.
FULL REPORT:
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2470


2. DEC-E2010-190: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds/Issues: Discrimination, Disability, Race. Grounds/Issues: Discrimination, Disability, Race.
Award: €5,000 for Discriminatory Dismissal.

The complainant submitted that he commenced employment with the respondent on 30 April 2007. On 2 May 2007, a computer fell onto the complainant's head, who suffered a concussion and other injuries. He was subsequently certified unfit for work for a period totalling 13 weeks. Towards the end of May, the complainant contacted his present solicitors and instructed them with regard to a personal injuries claim. The solicitors sent a letter which outlined the personal injuries claim to the respondent. Two weeks after the letter was sent, the complainant's employment was terminated. It was the complainant's contention that he was dismissed solely because of the fact that he took a personal injuries claim. He argued that he was now disabled.

The respondent contended dismissal was for poor performance. However, he presented no evidence of this and the Equality Officer awarded the complainant €5000 in compensation for his discriminatory dismissal. This award reflects the seriousness of discriminatorily dismissing a worker with a disability, yet also seeks to take into account the fact that the complainant was only present in the workplace for three days before he suffered his accident, and that his total employment relationship with the respondent only lasted for a couple of weeks.

FULL REPORT:
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2471


3. DEC-E2010-195: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Discriminatory Dismissal, Harassment, Discriminatory Treatment, Race.
Award: €2,500 for Discrimination.

The complainant, who is a Lithuanian national, commenced employment as a General Operative in February 2006. He was based at Huntstown Power Station where his employers were engaged as sub-contractors. He said that he was the only foreign national in his work-group although other foreign nationals were employed on the site. He said that his duties involved pouring concrete as well as driving and operating dumper trucks and roller vehicles. He said that he received very little on-site training and that he had been forced to drive and operate dumpers and rollers on site by his immediate foreman without a proper licence. He said that he had been told that if he refused he would either be sacked or be put manning the gates to the site. When he asked to be sent on a dumper training course, his employer refused to send him. The complainant believes that he was the only person pressurized into driving the dumpers and rollers without a licence and that this was because he was the only non-Irish member of the work-group. He paid for his own licence.

He was dismissed for reversing into a fire hydrant. The EO concluded this was not related to the complainant's race. However, the EO found the complainant's evidence more compelling in relation to being asked to drive without a licence and was satisfied that the respondent gave an instruction to the complainant, rather than to an Irish worker, to operate dumper trucks and roller vehicles without the necessary training or licence. The EO awarded €2,500.

FULL REPORT:
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2476


4. DEC-E2010-196: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Discrimination, Gender, Conditions of Employment, Sexual Harassment, Discriminatory Dismissal.
Award:€26988 for Sexual Harassment and €26988 for Victimisation and Victimisatory Dismissal plus interest.

The complainant submitted that she was repeatedly sexually harassed by Mr. A, director of the respondent, through offensive and inappropriate physical contact and remarks of a sexual nature contrary to S. 14A of the Acts. The respondent called a meeting to try to resolve the situation but it did not work. Eventually, the complainant was so distressed by the matter that she felt she had no option but to resign from her employment.

The respondent had no policies in place to prevent her harassment, and Mr A's behaviour did not stop until the complainant's employment relationship with the respondent came to an end. The EO therefore found that the complainant was discriminated against in her terms and conditions of employment. The complainant referred to several incidents after the meeting that she said constituted victimisation, including two aggressive incidents and a reduction of hours. Again, the EO found in the complainant's favour. He awarded €26,988 for discrimination and the same again for victimisation.

FULL REPORT:
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2477


5. DEC-E2010-197: An Employee -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Race, Discriminatory Treatment, Conditions of Employment, Dismissal.
Award: €15,000 for Discrimination.

The complainant is a Lithuanian national who alleged he was dismissed on grounds of race. He said others, including a Slovakian and Irish employee, both only had around eighteen months service as compared to his two and a half years - and these were retained in employment by the respondent. The respondent failed to turn up and was not represented at the hearing. The Equality Officer found the complainant to be a credible witness and awarded €15k compensation.

FULL REPORT:
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2478


6. DEC-2010-203: 4 Employees -v- An Employer

Grounds / Issues: Race, Discriminatory Treatment, Conditions of Employment, Dismissal.
Award: €750 each for Prusinskas and Asmontas for Discrimination.

The claims of all 4 Lithuanian claimants failed except one claim by two of the complainants, who successfully argued they were discriminated against by not being provided with a safety book translated into their own language. The Equality Officer commented:

"In 58 Complainants v Goode Concrete the Equality Officer held, in effect, that where an employer provides documentation to its employees in English only and does not provide some form of translation or explanation of the contents of that documentation in a language with some of the employees understand, it constitutes less favourable treatment of those employees contrary to the Acts. From my observation of the complainants at the Hearing I am satisfied that their command of English was not good and I am further satisfied, on balance, that it would have been poorer during the time they were employed by the respondent."

She awarded the two successful complainants €750 each.

FULL REPORT:
http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/index.asp?locID=181&docID=2484