Fired NCT team leader claims whistleblower was ex-wife making 'malicious' allegations

One allegation said that John farrell worked for several years at a local garage while also employed at an NCT test centre.

The firm that operates the National Car Test (NCT) dismissed a team leader after he admitted to bringing a vehicle owned by a local garage to an NCT centre and proceeded to test it himself and pass it.

The team leader concerned, John Farrell, sued for unfair dismissal after claiming that the ‘whisteblower’ in the case was actually his ex-wife and they were going through divorce proceedings at the time the allegations were being made to Applus and the Road Safety Authority (RSA).

Mr Farrell alleged that the allegations made against him by his former wife were done so maliciously.

However, Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) Adjudicator, Valerie Murtagh, has rejected Mr Farrell’s action, concluding that the Spanish-owned Applus Inspection Services Ireland Ltd’s action in dismissing him was “fair and proportionate”.

Ms Murtagh stated that what Mr Farrell did in driving a vehicle he didn’t own to a test centre and passing it “constituted a serious breach” of Applus’s expressly stated procedures. The vehicle in question failed an NCT test on July 2, 2020, on five separate points including extensive corrosion in one area.

However, Mr Farrell tested the vehicle again on July 15, 2020, when he passed it having brought it to the test centre himself. Ms Murtagh stated that Applus was justified in its findings and that dismissal was the appropriate sanction.

'Whistleblower' allegations

Applus became aware of the breach concerning Mr Farrell after a ‘whistleblower’ made detailed allegations to the Road Safety Authority (RSA) in March 2020.

The correspondence contained a number of explicit allegations against Mr Farrell including that he worked for several years at a local garage while also employed at an NCT test centre. It also alleged that Mr Farrell had brought a specific vehicle to the test centre and then proceeded to test the vehicle himself.

This followed a separate ‘whistleblower’ complaint to Applus in November 2017 which asked “What is your company policy on permanent NCT staff working at other garage establishments on days off and out of hours?” Applus was not able to identify the specific vehicle tester allegedly involved arising from the 2017 whistleblower allegation. 

John Farrell's claims

At the hearing, it was alleged by Mr Farrell that in an investigation meeting with Applus in September 2020, the so-called 'whistleblower' had not been anonymised with her initials on documents supplied by the company and was in fact his former wife and was “doing so maliciously”.

Mr Farrell stated that the timeframe of the complaints coincided with the timeframe that he and his former wife were going through divorce proceedings - 2017 was when he started divorce proceedings and is the same time as the initial complaint was made.

Mr Farrell further alleged that in March 2020, when the divorce was before the courts, that his former wife contacted the RSA on March 9, 2020, with additional allegations and also made herself known as the initial person who made the complaint in 2017.

Mr Farrell claimed that all the allegedly malicious comments made by his former wife were taken into consideration by Applus.

Mr Farrell commenced employment with Applus on September 15, 2008, as a vehicle inspector and was promoted to team leader on April 20, 2016, and prior to dismissal Mr Farrell had an excellent record.

Siptu claimed that Mr Farrell was unfairly dismissed based on a flawed process where specific allegations were not put to him and either upheld or not upheld. Mr Farrell also asserted that he was dismissed in similar circumstances where other employees received lesser sanctions.

Applus told the hearing that Mr Farrell’s actions go to the very heart of the firm’s business model and that the dismissal was a rational and reasonable reaction to the serious and coordinated breaches of company rules.

In her findings, Ms Murtagh rejected Siptu’s claim that the procedure was flawed in dismissing Mr Farrell.

Ms Murtagh stated that she found the evidence of Applus witnesses to be frank and credible “and I am satisfied that the disciplinary process was carried out in accordance with company procedures”.