in this video I want to talk about a recent decision of the WRC
in a sexual harassment case it was actually a case that we brought on
behalf of a client and it involves the sexual harassment of a catering
assistant in a particular catering establishment but in the heel of the
hunt we were very pleased with the decision of the WRC because the
adjudicator awarded 18 months salary 30000 euros to our client
the background to the case was that the complainant in question had been working
in the workplace for quite some time and had experienced sexual harassment
comments and innuendo and essentially inappropriate conduct of a sexual nature
towards her it climaxed however on one particular day when she alleged that the
harasser had pinched her on the bottom the complainant took exception to this
and it affected her quite badly it affected her so badly in fact that she was unable
to go back to work after the particular incident having gone to see her doctor
she did make a complaint in the workplace about sexual harassment and
the employer carried out an investigation part of the investigation
involved quite an extensive interviewing of a number of witnesses many of the
witnesses actually gave evidence which would have corroborated or supported the
allegation that the particular individual was prone to harassing
behavior especially of the female worker however the outcome of the investigation
was essentially that the employees go back into the workplace that they be
given some guidance or a reminder about their responsibilities and that was
pretty much that - my client wasn't happy with this and who could blame her so we
brought a claim on her behalf to the WRC for discrimination under the employment
Equality Act 1998 specifically sexual harassment over a period of time and we
named the employer as the respondent because the employer under the act is
vicariously liable for what goes on in the workplace this particular
instance our case was founded not on the employer not having policies or
procedures in place because they did it wasn't founded on them failing to carry out
an investigation because they did it was founded on our argument that the
findings of the investigation were perverse illogical and flew in the face
of the facts flew in the face of common sense
moreover the investigators appeared to impose a standard of proof beyond a
reasonable doubt when in fact the standard that should be applicable in an
employment situation is on the balance of probability was the story that my
client told on the balance of probability true that was the standard
but there wasn't a standard that was applied now in the course of the
investigation a number of other invested another number of other witnesses
other employees were brought in so they gave evidence that was damning of
the person against whom my client had made the complaint so our position was
very straightforward the findings of the investigation the conclusion was
essentially wrong it was irrational it was perverse and could not be arrived
at by any reasonable person looking at the evidence and looking at the facts
now the employer has when it comes to the WRC or indeed anything in relation to
discrimination has a defense and the defense is that either a they took
reasonable steps to prevent it from happening again or B they took steps to
reverse the consequences of the harassment in this particular case we
were arguing that this defense was not open to the employer because
notwithstanding the fact that I had policies and procedures in place it's
simply not good enough that you have procedures and policies in place if you
end up arriving at an irrational and perverse conclusion
secondly we said that the option of or that defense wasn't open to them because
in terms of reversing the effects of the harassment we said the employer didn't
do enough there even because essentially my client was being offered to be
transferred somewhere else when in fact my client was the victim
so the adjudicator essentially agreed with us agreed with our position
accepted that the employer didn't do enough that the response was inadequate
and found in our favor so the WRC agreed with our position that
the findings of the investigation were perverse and irrational and basically
that the employer avoided the responsibility to take the appropriate
action found that the findings of the investigation that was carried out were
contrived and evasive and an external investigator could have led to
a more balanced and reasonable outcome the adjudicator also found that the
evidence of the manager did not stand up that's the person against whom the
allegation was made and that the standard of proof was that was required
beyond reasonable doubt was unfair it should have been a civil standard of
proof on the balance of probability and the adjudicator made the point that sexual
harassment is much about power as about sex and the harassers intention was to
humiliate to complain and retrieve for himself some of the power that he
felt she possessed he may have felt a little bit threatened by what he
perceived to be the power that she held in the workplace by reason of her long
service and so on and her strong personality the bottom line is it's not
enough for an employer to carry out an investigation or have procedures if it's
only a box ticking exercise it's not enough to go through the motions and
arrive at after carrying out an investigation and irrational or absurd
outcome and the WRC take sexual harassment and
other types of discrimination very very seriously so if you're an employee and
something of this nature has happened you then certainly there is ways there
is methods by which and claims you can bring claim to the WRC is very
straightforward you do need to prove your case obviously
of course hope you find this video useful if you do you might give it a
thumbs up down below so I hope you find this video useful and that it might give
you some guidance as to what can happen at the WRC obviously not all claims are
going to succeed and this particular claim led to an award of 18 months
salary and because it's discrimination based claim the award has been made
without any deduction as it were in other words it will be tax free it's not like
income in an unfair dismissal case which is taxable discrimination based
compensation payment is generally not taxable so if this sort of video floats
your boat and rings your bell youmay be interested in subscribing to my youtube
channel I hope you find this one useful it has been a little bit disjointed
because of obviously how to do it in three pieces but just finishing it up
now bank holiday october bank holiday weekend but the bottom line is you
might give it a thumbs up down below if you're interested in this sort of thing
if you're interested in Irish law if you're interested in Irish business if
you find the video useful you may be interested in subscribing to my youtube
channel if that's the case then just hit the subscribe button down below
under the bell icon there that you can click as well if you want to get
notifications when I release a new video and I release a new video every week
every Saturday morning at 7 o'clock