Security firm ordered to take back worker who tried to share 'child pornography' video

It follows a Workplace Relations Commission finding that the security man was unfairly dismissed in May. File photo

A security firm here has been ordered to re-employ a security man it fired for attempting to circulate a video featuring alleged child pornography via Facebook messenger.

This follows Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) Adjudication Officer, Catherine Byrne, finding that the security man was unfairly dismissed in May of this year.

The man was dismissed for gross misconduct after a disciplinary meeting where the man stated that he thought that the naked female in the pornographic video was “the legal age” but that he didn’t watch the full video.

Ms Byrne said that the dismissal “was too severe and that a more reasonable sanction would have been a final written warning”.

Ms Byrne concluded: “I do not condone what the complainant did; however, I think some weight must be given to the fact that, prior to April 22nd 2020, there is no evidence that he tried to share an illegal image.

It is also my view that some consideration should have been given to the possibility that, on the night in question, he made a mistake.

Ms Byrne stated that in her view the employer should have accepted the security man’s explanation “that he made a mistake by attempting to share the video which contained an image of child pornography”.

Ms Byrne stated that she accepted that the security man's conduct was "extremely serious and may possibly be found to be a criminal offence".

Ms Byrne found that “the potentially criminal behaviour was not directed at the employer and I find that, apart from this incident, the complainant was an exemplary worker, with a sense of gratitude for his job and with no motivation whatsoever to harm his employer”.

Ms Byrne also found that the dismissal was unfair as the employer conducted the investigation meeting and the disciplinary hearing without making a more robust effort to explain to the security man the benefit of being represented.

Ms Byrne stated that instead of the dismissal, the company should issue a final written warning to the worker and ‘re-engage’ him before Thursday, December 17.

Ms Byrne said that the period of seven months from the date of his dismissal last May is to be considered as unpaid suspension.

Evidence

The man was unfairly dismissed arising from him attempting to send a video via Facebook messenger using his mobile phone while stationed at a gate office of a multi-national tech company on April 22 last.

There were seven or eight people in the group, including some work colleagues and the complainant’s brother and cousins.

The video that the man, living here since 2016, attempted to send was blocked by Facebook and his account was suspended for three days.

The security man used the guest Wi-Fi and on April 30, the client tech company informed the complainant and the security company's HR manager that the video he attempted to share contained an image of child exploitation.

The incident was reported to gardaí and gardaí recommended that the security man be removed from his role as a security officer on the premises. The man was suspended pending an investigation into the sending of the video.

At an investigation meeting, the security man said that he was ashamed about what had happened and that he had left the group.

The letter of dismissal on May 18 last stated that the content of the video was in violation of Facebook’s policy on child exploitation imagery and the man’s attempt to share the video was reported to the gardaí.

The security company’s chief operations officers said: “We are unable to understand how a security professional in our team could try and share something so serious that it is alerted to law enforcement and by so doing could bring our reputation and the relationship with our client into jeopardy.” 

The security worker's testimony

In his submission to the WRC, the security man stated that he regretted what happened and that he is not proud of what he did.

He said: “From my point of view, what I did was bad, but the punishment is too severe.”

He said that he was sent the video by a friend and that he didn’t check it before he tried to send it on.

At the time, the man had been employed by the company for almost three years, and there was no evidence that he accessed child pornography before.

The man’s wife gave evidence to state that they lost their mortgage approval, because the only job that he could get after the man's dismissal was with a waste collection company on a lower salary.