NI charity to pay €43k compo for sex discrimination

A top charity in the North has been ordered to pay out more than £30,000 (€43,000) after being found guilty of sex discrimination against a former staff member, it was revealed tonight.

Action Cancer was ordered to pay compensation to west Belfast woman Cathy Megahey for her unfair dismissal and failure to land a new position with the organisation.

Ms Megahey, 44, was overlooked for the retail manager’s job despite performing best in the first round of interviews.

A man who worked under her was appointed, even though an Industrial Tribunal judged his application so poor he should not have been shortlisted.

Another strong female candidate pulled out after the chairman of the selection panel phoned her to put her off the job, the tribunal decided.

Although she was the first to take a case against Action Cancer, Mrs Megahey claimed tonight it seemed to be plagued by a culture of sexual discrimination.

She said: “I feel very betrayed and hurt by them.

“They were only my third main employer – I spent 14 years in my first job and 10 with my second.

“I would have been with Action Cancer for a long time because I stay loyal. But all of a sudden to find my employer was treating me in such a way when I hadn’t done anything wrong, I didn’t deserve that treatment.

“I felt rejected and unwanted.”

But Action Cancer, which expressed deep disappointment at the outcome, is considering an appeal.

Mrs Megahey had worked as a retail support officer with the charity for three years before being made redundant in June 2005.

Based at its east Belfast warehouse, she had overseen eight shops across Northern Ireland and acted up while the director was off on leave.

She applied for the retail manager’s position, advertised as part of a shake-up within the department, only to lose out to another member of staff who worked under her.

In its decision issued this month, the tribunal found she suffered sexual discrimination and was unfairly dismissed from her post.

But for that she would probably have been appointed, the panel ruled.

Instead, interviewers decided to hold a second interview for three candidates, at which she was awarded one mark less than the man appointed.

Criticisms of the recruitment process identified by the tribunal included:

:: no female included in the shortlisting panel;

:: the successful candidate’s application was seriously lacking in information so that the tribunal could not see how he made it through to interview.

:: they could not understand why, in this recruitment, there was a scarcity of notes;

:: the panel chairman telephoned another female candidate, between the first and second interviews, who subsequently withdrew her application.

The tribunal considered, on the balance of probabilities, the purpose was to discourage this strong female candidate from continuing in the competition for the post.

Mrs Megahey, who did not know her female rival, has even conceded she was probably the best person for the job.

“Looking at her qualifications and what she had been doing long before me she was a strong female candidate who would have got the job had she gone through,” she said.

“It was only on the day of the second interview I discovered there was only me and AN Other who I had been line manager to.”

Eileen Lavery of the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland, which supported Mrs Megahey’s case, claimed the decision reinforced the need for all employers to follow code of practice guidelines on removing sex bias from recruitment processes.

She added: “Where discrimination occurs the results can be devastating for the individual affected.

“The tribunal have awarded Mrs Megahey a substantial sum in compensation and have commented on the humiliation she suffered through no fault of her own.

“The Equality Commission can advise any person who believes they may have suffered sex discrimination of their rights and will consider applications for assistance in taking a case forward to tribunal.”

In a statement, Action Cancer said tonight the tribunal had ignored the fact that, over the past three years, the number of women working for the charity has increased by 52% from 25 to 64, as presented in the regular monitoring returns to the Equality Commission.

It added: “However, the tribunal did reject the general allegation made by the complainant of sex discrimination against females having allegedly occurred in recent years.

“In relation to this matter and throughout the Tribunal process Action Cancer has acted in good faith and at all times with the highest professionalism and is currently taking legal advice in relation to appealing the Tribunal’s decision.

“Action Cancer has been and will remain fully committed to selection on merit with regard to all posts and appointments.”