WRC finds worker unfairly dismissed by retailer after negative social media review

A retail worker was unfairly dismissed by a retailer after a customer posted a negative review on social media that the worker allegedly refused to sell a lottery ticket to a male relative with additional needs, the WRC found.

A retail worker was unfairly dismissed by a retailer after a customer posted a negative review on social media that the worker allegedly refused to sell a lottery ticket to a male relative with additional needs, the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) found.

In the case at the WRC, Adjudication Officer Louise Boyle has ordered the retailer to pay the worker €5,100 for her unfair dismissal and for not providing the worker her terms of employment.

In her findings, Ms Boyle found that there has been little evidence of procedural fairness or natural justice in the dispute which included no right of appeal for the worker.

In the case, the worker was eventually sacked by the retailer after a review of the store was posted on social media on May 15 last.

The review detailed that relatives of the reviewer, one of whom is an adult with additional needs and is non-verbal, had been told that store policy is not to serve lottery tickets to people with additional needs.

The retail worker was asked by her employer had she served the man with additional needs on May 11 and the worker denied serving the customer on the date.

Two days after the review on May 17 the retail worker was suspended with pay pending an investigation into “allegation of discrimination and false representation of company policy”.

The worker was sacked five days later on May 22.

The worker told the WRC that she was shocked to receive a letter of dismissal for gross misconduct.

The worker told the hearing that losing her job had never been suggested to her before as a possible outcome.

The retail worker told the hearing she was also shocked to see that her employer replied to the social media posting by detailing that the incident “may result in severe disciplinary sanctions” and that “the staff member involved acted independently and is presently being dealt with”.

The worker outlined that the matter was never fully investigated, there were no statements taken, no right of appeal, no disciplinary meeting, inappropriate postings by the retailer of the status of the investigation on social media and no CCTV provided.

The retail worker also pointed out that no till receipts were reviewed, no particulars of alleged witnesses, no notes given to her of the investigative meeting, a lack of fair procedures and rights to natural justice.

The employer did not attend the hearing which Ms Boyle described as ‘unfortunate’.

In an email to the WRC, the retailer admitted that there may have been a small number of errors made on its part in the administration element of the suspension and the ultimate dismissal due to an inexperience with a matter of this magnitude.

The retailer argued that the core issue was that a very serious complaint was made by a long-standing customer against the retail worker.

In her findings, Ms Boyle found that there was merit in the worker’s unfair dismissal claim and taking into consideration the circumstances of the dispute as well as the significant upset caused to the worker, she awarded the worker the sum of €4,000.

Ms Boyle awarded the worker an additional €1,100 for not receiving her terms and conditions of employment.