Physio who took case against GAA club for unfair dismissal has WRC claim dismissed

The Workplace Relations Commission found that the physio did not have standing to claim unfair dismissal. File picture

A physio who took a case against GAA club for unfair dismissal has had his claim dismissed by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) as he was not deemed to have been “engaged under a contract of service at any time material to this claim”.

Clive White took a case against St. Laurence O'Toole Gaelic Athletics Club in Carlow with whom he had an arrangement to attend home and away games and provide first aid services since 2018. A fee of €80 was agreed between the parties for each game.

If team management requested, the complainant also provided physical therapy services one to two days per week.

In March 2023, the complainant said that the treasurer of the club approached him to pay for his services through payroll but he was told that nothing would change in terms of how his work was performed or the agreement between the parties.

The treasurer, John Maher, told the WRC he became concerned that “any misclassification of the complainant or the failure of the complainant to pay taxes due on any money received for his services might have financial implications for the club”.

In March 2025, Mr White said he approached the club to request an increase in his match attendance fee from €80 to €90.

Several weeks later, Mr White said he received a phone call from the club’s chairman David Hoare who informed him that the fee would not be increased and that the club was moving forward with another therapist due to an increase in the number of games.

“The complainant asked where that left him. Mr Hoare responded that he could not guarantee the complainant what game time he would or wouldn’t get,” the WRC said.

After the phone call, Mr White wrote to the club treasurer requesting his notice in writing and departure date from the club.

Under cross-examination at the WRC, Mr White accepted he did not receive any benefits, expenses or annual leave and that he accepted a fixed fee per game.

“He accepted there was no written employment contract in place,” the WRC said.

“The complainant did not query the lack of annual leave or employment benefits, as he viewed his role as part-time and limited to matches and mid-week treatments.” 

In response to the case, Mr Hoare submitted that Mr White was not an employee within the meaning of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 and therefore has no standing to take a case for unfair dismissal.

“Mr Hoare submitted, on behalf of the respondent, that no contract of employment existed between the parties,” the WRC said.

In its conclusion, the WRC said Mr White “was not, on the balance of probabilities, engaged under a contract of service at any time material to this claim”.

“Accordingly, I find the complainant does not have the standing to pursue a complaint under the Act, and I must conclude that the complainant was not unfairly dismissed.”