Unfair dismissal case raises question on governance of Active Retirement Network charity

The incident at ARNI highlights  the charity's governance as three board members including the chair — whose signature appeared on the letter — say they were unaware of the development

Former president of Active Retirement Network Ireland Kay Murphy says she is 'quite sure' she did not sign the letter dismissing Siobhan Hopkins. Picture: Dan Linehan

Governance issues in charities have come to the fore in recent years. There have been high-profile incidents of individuals behaving in a manner that would not have been deemed acceptable in a corporate setting, where focus is on accountability and the bottom line. 

Now, questions are arising about another charity, Active Retirement Network Ireland (ARNI).

ARNI does vital work, organising activities for senior citizens at a crucial stage in life. The membership-led organisation had 25,000 members pre-pandemic and is rebuilding. 

It is staffed by a small executive team of seven, but the board is made up of members. The executive team is led by Maureen Kavanagh. 

Her son, Peter Kavanagh, who recently completed a term as mayor of South Dublin County Council, is the communications manager of ARNI.

Last Monday the Irish Examiner reported on a highly controversial sacking in the organisation, which was deemed an “unfair dismissal” by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC). 

Peter Kavanagh, who recently completed a term as mayor of South Dublin County Council, is the communications manager of ARNI. Picture: Marc O'Sullivan

Siobhan Hopkins was summarily suspended in January 2020 after viewing an innocuous WhatsApp message on Peter Kavanagh’s workstation. Three months earlier, she had made a complaint under sick leave policy about Peter Kavanagh.

Her suspension was described by the WRC as “opportunistic, punitive and effected without due rigour”. Following a disciplinary process — which involved employing five different HR consultant firms and was criticised by the WRC — she was then dismissed. 

Dismissal 'extremely harsh'

A recommendation by an appeal officer that she not be dismissed was ignored. The WRC described the dismissal as “extremely harsh” and one which “no reasonable employee would have [done] in the circumstances”. 

The WRC also criticised various conflicts of interest in the case, particularly that of the CEO being involved in a process against an employee who had previously complained about her son.

Now, it is emerging that there were other aspects to the sacking of Ms Hopkins that give rise to questions of governance. Following a series of questions from the Irish Examiner earlier this week, an emergency board meeting of ARNI was convened on Wednesday last.

At issue is whether or not the board of ARNI had any detailed knowledge of the dismissal of Siobhan Hopkins or whether they were effectively kept in the dark. 

The Irish Examiner has learned that minutes from the board meeting around the time she was dismissed have no specific reference to the dismissal and no discussion on it. Neither do the minutes from the time record that the appeals officer decision was ignored.

Siobhan Hopkins was informed of her dismissal by letter in October 2020. The letter was signed by Maureen Kavanagh and the then president of ARNI, Kay Murphy. Ms Murphy’s signature was in electronic form.

Earlier this year, Ms Hopkins contacted Kay Murphy as she was still aggrieved over how she had been treated, notwithstanding the vindication she received at the WRC.

Responding to her, Ms Murphy wrote: “Thank you for your email. Shocking as it was. Your letter of dismissal was a whole new revelation to me and it is the very first time I’ve seen it … I certainly didn’t write it.” 

Kay Murphy confirmed this position to the Irish Examiner. “I am quite sure I didn’t sign it,” she says. 

When I became aware of it I rang the CEO and she informed me that my board had instructed me to sign it. I asked to be sent the minutes of the September 2020 board meeting but I heard nothing since. 

This newspaper has seen the minutes from the September 2020 board meeting. The minutes do not include an instruction to dismiss Siobhan Hopkins, nor make any reference to her dismissal. The only reference to the case is in relation to a grievance procedure Ms Hopkins had taken over how she had been treated.

'Unease' over handling of matter

Serving and former board members of ARNI confirmed there was “a lot of unease” over the handling of the matter, both because of how it reflected on the organisation and in sympathy for Siobhan Hopkins, who was known to many of the board members.

To that end, a number of motions were placed before this year’s AGM, conducted last May, but were ruled out of order. The current president, Anne Drury, told the Irish Examiner that these were effectively statements presented as motions. She said anybody who wanted their say at the AGM was given the opportunity to do so.

At Active Retirement Ireland’s launch of ‘The Old Country’ audio series on community radio stations in Ireland were Cllr. Peter Kavanagh, mayor of South Dublin; Teresa Quinn, volunteer and presenter with CRAOL Community Radio; Pat Quinn of CRAOL Community Radio Ireland; and Maureen Kavanagh, CEO of Active Retirement Ireland.

Meanwhile, around the same time, Siobhan Hopkins wrote to ARNI on foot of her interaction with Kay Murphy. She accused ARNI of forgery in relation to Ms Murphy’s signature on the dismissal letter.

A reply was prepared by leading Dublin law firm Mason Hayes Curran, dated April 20, 2022. It refuted the allegation of forgery.

It went on: “Ms Kay Murphy, who was then the president of ARNI, was actively involved in the meetings, correspondence and decision-making concerning your disciplinary and dismissal from the organisation in 2020." 

For health and safety concerns arising out of Covid-19, and for convenience, Ms Murphy’s signature was electronically placed on your dismissal letter. She had full knowledge of the content of the letter and consented to her signature being affixed thereto. 

The correspondence also stated Ms Murphy had been copied on the email containing the dismissal letter.

For some reason, the email was never sent but two months after it was drafted, Kay Murphy received a copy from the board of ARNI. She was extremely annoyed over how she was represented in it and wrote immediately to the legal firm. 

“Mason Hayes Curran act for Active Retirement Ireland; this is accurate. However, you do not act for me. I have had no communication from your office regarding your correspondence dated 20 April 2022.” She said she found this alarming.

She addressed her alleged role in the decision-making process about Siobhan Hopkins.

“Not only was I not ‘actively involved’ in any decision-making process, regarding the allegations against Siobhan Hopkins, I was not involved at all.” 

She also refuted she had full knowledge of the letter or consented for her signature to be attached to it.

I have repeatedly requested copies of the minutes of the meeting where it is alleged that I had knowledge of this letter and consented to have my signature electronically affixed thereto. These minutes have not been forthcoming. 

Ms Murphy told the Irish Examiner that in 2020, she did receive reports as the process against Ms Hopkins was progressing, but she was not consulted and did not partake in any meetings about the matter.

Two people who were members of the board in 2020 have confirmed their recollection of events coincides with that of Kay Murphy.

The current president (ARNI uses the term president for chair of the board) Anne Drury told the Irish Examiner the dismissal was a decision of the board. 

Following the emergency board meeting on Wednesday, Ms Drury issued a statement saying the board “is aware that some individuals remain unhappy as to how certain HR matters have been dealt with and this will be raised as the next board meeting”.

Maureen Kavanagh told the WRC she had a good working relationship with Siobhan Hopkins before the WhatsApp incident involving her son Peter. Yet Ms Hopkins was dismissed in an expensive, convoluted process which has been heavily criticised by the WRC. 

It remains unclear the extent to which the board was aware of what was going on, whether they sanctioned it or whether they were, as some of them contend, kept in the dark.