Commission hears Turkish speaking 'content reviewer' was sacked for calling Kurd colleague a 'terrorist'

A Turkish speaking ‘content reviewer’ at a consultancy firm here was sacked earlier this year after she allegedly called a Kurdish work colleague a “terrorist”.

In the case, the woman was sacked within three months of being employed in November 2017 “due to her unacceptable behaviour and negative attitude in the workplace”.

The woman has unsuccessfully sued for unfair dismissal at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) against the recruitment firm that identified her for the post.

In its submission to the WRC, the recruitment firm referenced “a number of unpleasant incidents that she was involved in in relation to internal Turkish politics specifically regarding people of a Kurdish origin”.

The recruitment firm stated that “allegations of calling a Kurdish fellow employee a ‘terrorist’ were made as well as negative remarks regarding Kurdish political organisations".

The recruitment firm stated: “These remarks caused great upset to some fellow employees.”

The recruitment firm also stated that the woman “was also uncooperative and disruptive during training”.

On February 15th last the woman “received a phone call telling her that her contract was terminated and to return all her security details and badges”.

In her case, the woman alleged that she was dismissed on pregnancy grounds.

She stated that she informed her supervisor at the consultancy firm that she was pregnant and would not be able to do 24-hour shifts.

She stated that a few weeks later she had a back pain and her manager told her to stay at home the next day.

The woman stated that she was sacked on February 15th 2018 and there was no warning or explanation given.

In its submission to the WRC, the recruitment firm stated that it was unaware that the worker was pregnant when the decision to dismiss her, at the behest of the client firm, was taken on the grounds of her misconduct.

In his ruling, WRC Adjudication Officer, Michael McEntee stated that the recruitment firm is not the correct respondent in the case particularly in a case where the pregnancy/maternity issue is being raised so centrally.

Mr McEntee stated that as a result, the unfair dismissal case against the recruitment agency cannot be deemed to be well founded and must fail.