Woman awarded €45k over sexual harassment by boss

AN office worker has been awarded €45,000 after the Equality Tribunal ruled that she had been sexually harassed on a “continuous and ongoing” basis lasting over five years by her employer.

The woman, who began work with the unnamed security firm in March 2002, at the age of 15, said she was subjected to offensive comments and treatment from the outset by the company’s managing director.

She claimed his behaviour got progressively worse as he made offensive comments, told dirty jokes and touched her inappropriately.

He also hung a picture of a naked woman in her office and refused to take it down. The woman said that she was afraid to be alone in the office with her boss. Although still an employee of the firm, she has been on sick leave since July 2007.

The managing director denied he had ever treated the woman inappropriately.

The tribunal noted the man was reluctant to cooperate with the tribunal and had expressed disregard for its work. He was ordered to pay the woman €45,000 compensation plus interest dating back to August 2007.

It also ordered him to put in place a code on the prevention of harassment by next April.

The tribunal said the harassment experienced by the woman had resulted in a degrading humiliating and offensive work environment which led to her suffering stress-related illness.

In another case, the tribunal ordered Eircom to pay a female employee, Patricia O’Brien, compensation of €55,000 and to award her equal pay after she claimed she was entitled to the same rate of pay as two male colleagues who carried out similar work.

The tribunal ruled that Ms O’Brien had been victimised on grounds of gender and discriminated against by Eircom’s failure to grant her equal pay since October 2003.

It heard that an Eircom manager had marked Ms O’Brien as “underperforming”, despite the fact that she had exceeded her targets by €11 million as consumer accounts manager. While out on a period of sick leave due to stress, Eircom invited her to apply for her position which was being restructured. She was subsequently re-assigned to another role against her wishes.

Meanwhile, the tribunal expressed “grave concern” over the manner in which the Intercountry Adoption Services (ICAS) reached its decision in refusing to certify a couple as suitable adoptive parents.

The couple complained that they had been discriminated against on the grounds of disability as the female partner suffered from rheumatoid arthritis and related complications. They had already adopted a baby boy from the Ukraine in 2001 but stricter rules were subsequently introduced.

The tribunal heard that Dr Paul Gueret, a medical expert hired by ICAS to assess their suitability, never met the couple. Neither were they ever given a copy of his medical assessments.

Although the tribunal ruled that ICAS had discriminated against the couple, it did not order any monetary compensation.

Instead, it ordered ICAS to engage a different, independent medical advisor with expertise in rheumatoid arthritis to assess the woman. All other measurements of the couple’s suitability should be deemed to have been already met because of delays in processing their application.