This is the main content layout table. This structures the main page content, and the secondary menus and banners
Home About Us Services Publications Information Publications Research Publications Codes of Practice Policy Publications Good Practice Publications Annual Reports Casework Reports Newsletters Submissions Articles All Articles Update by CEO Case Reports EU Briefings Information FAQs Events Research Equality Mainstreaming Unit Links Contact Us Translations Sitemap Gaeilge	Case Reports - Autumn 2009 Woman Awarded €30,000 euros for gender discrimination and harassment The Equality Authority welcomed a recent decision to award €30,000 in compensation for discrimination. The award was made by the Equality Tribunal to Ms. Boyle in relation to her conditions of employment. It was awarded to her on grounds of gender, gender harassment and dismissal. The complainant was represented by the Equality Authority. Ms Boyle, who worked as a Housing Manager was given the substantial award as compensation for the distress (inclusive of loss of earnings) suffered by her as a consequence of her discrimination. The case was taken by Ms Boyle, who managed student accommodation in Donegal, and was subject to foul and abusive language from her line manager, who asserted that as a woman she could not control the students, 'what they needed was a man to sort them out'. She was also the subject matter of graffiti in the student accommodation. Ms Boyle was subsequently instructed to arrange job interviews without being made aware that she was to be replaced through the interview process. Witness stated that her replacement 'had been recruited to replace her. Her replacement had been instructed to fire her on his arrival and to ensure she was off the premises immediately'. 'No grievance or disciplinary procedure existed and she was never formally informed that there was any issue with her performance during her employment with the respondent'. (DEC-E2009-013, Equality Tribunal) The respondent, Ely Property Group Ltd, was ordered to introduce a Code of Practice on Harassment, to arrange training on the operation of the Code for all employees with staff management functions, and to issue the respondent with her P45 without any further delay. These measures were in addition to the financial compensation awarded to Ms. Boyle. The Boyle case is a timely reminder that employers need to be vigilant in tackling all forms of discrimination and harassment in the workplace. The circumstances of Ms Boyle's case were particularly severe in that she was deemed unsuitable for a particular job, not because of her performance but because of her gender. The case also highlighted the high cost of failing to implement proper procedures to protect employees from discrimination and harassment in the workplace. The ordering of the implementation of a Code of Practice on Harassment and of management training is particularly welcome and is best practice for any employment to be productive and fair. Employees are entitled under the Employment Equality Acts to protection from harassment in the workplace from management, colleagues and customers and to conduct their business in an atmosphere of dignity and respect for all. Eagle Star v Equality Tribunal and Hugh O'Neill and Bernadette Treanor (Notice Party) In this case a judgment was delivered under the Equal Status Acts where Eagle Star Life Assurance Company had asked the High Court to quash a decision made by the Equality Tribunal. Ms Bernadette Treanor who is an Equality Officer with the Equality Tribunal had referred a complaint to the Tribunal against Eagle Star in 2002 on the basis that she was being discriminated against on the grounds of disability in the imposition of a loading on her income protection policy. The Equality Tribunal subsequently appointed a temporary external equality officer to hear the complaint in 2006 but Eagle Star considered that at this stage the complaint should be dismissed because it had not been pursued by Ms Treanor. Eagle Star also disputed the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear the complaint in light of the definition of disability contained in the Equal Status Act 2000 which, they contended, did not cover the complainant's circumstances. Mr Justice Hedigan held that Ms Treanor had complied with all the time limits imposed on her, statutory or otherwise, and has in general furnished any information required by the Tribunal in a prompt and efficient manner. Mr Justice Hedigan held that the director of the Equality Tribunal had acted in accordance with the terms of the Equal Status Act in declining to dismiss the complaint. He also held that the temporary equality officer does have jurisdiction to consider Ms Treanor's complaint. In doing so he quoted from the judgment of Mr Justice Charleton in Doherty v. South Dublin County Council which "affirmed the importance of judicial restraint in such matters, to ensure that the High Court does not prematurely trespass into the special jurisdiction assigned to the Tribunal by the 2000 Act." The Equality Authority supported Ms Treanor in the High Court and welcomed the judgement of Mr Justice Hedigan which holds that the primary responsibility for interpreting the provisions of the Equal Status Acts 2000 - 2008 rests with the Equality Officer. This is an important affirmation of the jurisdiction of the Equality Tribunal. 'Same day only' ticket policy restriction for commuters with disabilities to be reviewed The Equality Authority represented a successful Equal Status case before the Equality Tribunal under the disability ground. (Ref DEC-S2009-015). This case concerned a complainant, Sean Thompson, who has a visual impairment and uses the Department of Social and Family Affairs Free Travel Pass on Irish Rail DART to go to work. He is required to queue each day, and is prohibited from getting a ticket in advance as non-travel pass customers can do. He claimed the 'same day only' restriction for the travel tickets constituted discrimination under the Equal Status Acts and was a failure to provide reasonable accommodation to a person with a disability. He could not get a ticket the evening before or avail of the weekly or monthly travel facility available to other passengers. Irish Rail submitted that the 'same day only' policy is necessary in order to safeguard the company against fraudulent activity. The Equality Officer of the Equality Tribunal awarded Mr Thompson 750 euros in compensation as redress for the inconvenience caused, and ordered that Irish Rail review its policy in terms of the requirement for the holders of the Free Travel Pass to present at the ticket office on each day of travel to acquire a ticket in order to ensure that its policy is in full compliance with the terms of the Equal Status Acts. This unfair situation whereby Mr Thompson had his commuting time considerably lengthened daily because he was being treated differently to other customers has been satisfactorily addressed by the outcome of this important case. There are measures available within the scheme where a travel pass ID and the ticket can be required on inspection - thus safeguarding against fraudulent use of this important support. People with disabilities already have a higher unemployment rate than others. If their commuting time were to be unfairly lengthened with the increased risk of lateness, it would further disadvantage workers with disabilities who rely on public transport. The Equality Authority welcomed the decision of the Equality Tribunal which brings common sense and equality to bear on an everyday situation and looks forward to Irish Rail incorporating the findings of the Tribunal into their customer service. This will augment Irish Rail's continuing good work to make the rail network more accessible to people with disabilities. Full copies of the above decisions are available at www.equalitytribunal.ie Note: This article is taken from the Autumn 2009 edition of Equality news	Search Tick the box to search just the current location and its sublocations Advanced Search

Case Reports - Autumn 2009

Woman Awarded €30,000 euros for gender discrimination and harassment

The Equality Authority welcomed a recent decision to award €30,000 in compensation for discrimination. The award was made by the Equality Tribunal to Ms. Boyle in relation to her conditions of employment. It was awarded to her on grounds of gender, gender harassment and dismissal. The complainant was represented by the Equality Authority.

Ms Boyle, who worked as a Housing Manager was given the substantial award as compensation for the distress (inclusive of loss of earnings) suffered by her as a consequence of her discrimination.
The case was taken by Ms Boyle, who managed student accommodation in Donegal, and was subject to foul and abusive language from her line manager, who asserted that as a woman she could not control the students, 'what they needed was a man to sort them out'. She was also the subject matter of graffiti in the student accommodation. Ms Boyle was subsequently instructed to arrange job interviews without being made aware that she was to be replaced through the interview process. Witness stated that her replacement 'had been recruited to replace her. Her replacement had been instructed to fire her on his arrival and to ensure she was off the premises immediately'.

'No grievance or disciplinary procedure existed and she was never formally informed that there was any issue with her performance during her employment with the respondent'. (DEC-E2009-013, Equality Tribunal)

The respondent, Ely Property Group Ltd, was ordered to introduce a Code of Practice on Harassment, to arrange training on the operation of the Code for all employees with staff management functions, and to issue the respondent with her P45 without any further delay. These measures were in addition to the financial compensation awarded to Ms. Boyle.

The Boyle case is a timely reminder that employers need to be vigilant in tackling all forms of discrimination and harassment in the workplace. The circumstances of Ms Boyle's case were particularly severe in that she was deemed unsuitable for a particular job, not because of her performance but because of her gender.

The case also highlighted the high cost of failing to implement proper procedures to protect employees from discrimination and harassment in the workplace. The ordering of the implementation of a Code of Practice on Harassment and of management training is particularly welcome and is best practice for any employment to be productive and fair.

Employees are entitled under the Employment Equality Acts to protection from harassment in the workplace from management, colleagues and customers and to conduct their business in an atmosphere of dignity and respect for all.

Eagle Star v Equality Tribunal and Hugh O'Neill and Bernadette Treanor (Notice Party)

In this case a judgment was delivered under the Equal Status Acts where Eagle Star Life Assurance Company had asked the High Court to quash a decision made by the Equality Tribunal. Ms Bernadette Treanor who is an Equality Officer with the Equality Tribunal had referred a complaint to the Tribunal against Eagle Star in 2002 on the basis that she was being discriminated against on the grounds of disability in the imposition of a loading on her income protection policy.

The Equality Tribunal subsequently appointed a temporary external equality officer to hear the complaint in 2006 but Eagle Star considered that at this stage the complaint should be dismissed because it had not been pursued by Ms Treanor. Eagle Star also disputed the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear the complaint in light of the definition of disability contained in the Equal Status Act 2000 which, they contended, did not cover the complainant's circumstances.

Mr Justice Hedigan held that Ms Treanor had complied with all the time limits imposed on her, statutory or otherwise, and has in general furnished any information required by the Tribunal in a prompt and efficient manner.

Mr Justice Hedigan held that the director of the Equality Tribunal had acted in accordance with the terms of the Equal Status Act in declining to dismiss the complaint. He also held that the temporary equality officer does have jurisdiction to consider Ms Treanor's complaint. In doing so he quoted from the judgment of Mr Justice Charleton in Doherty v. South Dublin County Council which "affirmed the importance of judicial restraint in such matters, to ensure that the High Court does not prematurely trespass into the special jurisdiction assigned to the Tribunal by the 2000 Act."

The Equality Authority supported Ms Treanor in the High Court and welcomed the judgement of Mr Justice Hedigan which holds that the primary responsibility for interpreting the provisions of the Equal Status Acts 2000 - 2008 rests with the Equality Officer. This is an important affirmation of the jurisdiction of the Equality Tribunal.

'Same day only' ticket policy restriction for commuters with disabilities to be reviewed

The Equality Authority represented a successful Equal Status case before the Equality Tribunal under the disability ground. (Ref DEC-S2009-015).

This case concerned a complainant, Sean Thompson, who has a visual impairment and uses the Department of Social and Family Affairs Free Travel Pass on Irish Rail DART to go to work. He is required to queue each day, and is prohibited from getting a ticket in advance as non-travel pass customers can do. He claimed the 'same day only' restriction for the travel tickets constituted discrimination under the Equal Status Acts and was a failure to provide reasonable accommodation to a person with a disability. He could not get a ticket the evening before or avail of the weekly or monthly travel facility available to other passengers.

Irish Rail submitted that the 'same day only' policy is necessary in order to safeguard the company against fraudulent activity. The Equality Officer of the Equality Tribunal awarded Mr Thompson 750 euros in compensation as redress for the inconvenience caused, and ordered that Irish Rail review its policy in terms of the requirement for the holders of the Free Travel Pass to present at the ticket office on each day of travel to acquire a ticket in order to ensure that its policy is in full compliance with the terms of the Equal Status Acts.

This unfair situation whereby Mr Thompson had his commuting time considerably lengthened daily because he was being treated differently to other customers has been satisfactorily addressed by the outcome of this important case. There are measures available within the scheme where a travel pass ID and the ticket can be required on inspection - thus safeguarding against fraudulent use of this important support.

People with disabilities already have a higher unemployment rate than others. If their commuting time were to be unfairly lengthened with the increased risk of lateness, it would further disadvantage workers with disabilities who rely on public transport. The Equality Authority welcomed the decision of the Equality Tribunal which brings common sense and equality to bear on an everyday situation and looks forward to Irish Rail incorporating the findings of the Tribunal into their customer service.

This will augment Irish Rail's continuing good work to make the rail network more accessible to people with disabilities.

Full copies of the above decisions are available at www.equalitytribunal.ie

Note: This article is taken from the Autumn 2009 edition of Equality news