FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 27, EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY ACT, 1977 PARTIES : A COMPANY (REPRESENTED BY COOPERS & LYBRAND) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY THE EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY AGENCY) DIVISION : Chairman: Employer Member: Worker Member: |
1. Dispute concerning the alleged unfair dismissal of a worker in contravention of Section 3(4) of the Employment Equality Act, 1977 ('the Act').
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company was established in early 1994. It made fresh pasta to supply to restaurants.
The worker commenced employment with the Company on 1st December, 1994. Her duties included book-keeping and general secretarial work. She claims that throughout her employment she was sexually harassed by a member of management and that she was dismissed as a direct result of that discrimination. She further claims that a second member of management who resided outside of Ireland indicated that he would like to know her on a more personal basis.
The Company did not attend the Court hearing but the Liquidator of the Company was represented. The representative indicated that he was unable to contest the allegations as the matter before the Court had occurred before the Liquidator was appointed on 5th September, 1995.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The complaint must be based on a misunderstanding. A probable cultural difference and a poor understanding of the English language by the respondent may have caused the misunderstanding.
ORDER:
The Court considered written and oral submissions made on behalf of the claimant. The Liquidator's representative supplied the Court with a statement from one director of the Company and a memorandum which outlined a telephone conversation with another.
The Court does not accept the argument made by the Company director that cultural differences and a poor understanding of the English language caused the claimant's problems.
The Court was quite specific in her evidence when outlining the behaviour she endured during her employment with the Company.
Based on the history of events outlined to the Court, the Court is satisfied that there was ongoing sexual harassment of the claimant
The claimant had no written contract of employment. No complaint about her work was made to her, and she was given no satisfactory explanation for her dismissal.
On the basis of the evidence presented to the Court, the Court finds that the employer did contravene Section 3(4) of the Act in relation to the dismissal of the worker in that she was subjected to discrimination in her working conditions and in the circumstances of her dismissal
Having regard to all the circumstances of this case the Court will make an Order directing the employer to pay to the claimant the sum of £3,200.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
8th May, 1996______________________
F.B./D.T.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Order should be addressed to Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.