Donegal company ordered to pay worker €106,000 in discrimination case

A Donegal company has been ordered to pay a sales representative €106,000 in compensation on the grounds of discrimination charges. 

Sales representative Damien O’Doherty, the complainant, took a case against FM Salon Supplies Ltd, a Letterkenny-based company, because he felt he was being discriminated against on the grounds of age and his disability,  contrary to the Employment Equality Act 1998. 

Mr O’Doherty, who worked at the company for 22 years, claimed that his then-employers agreed on a different pay system with a younger colleague and additionally, the respondent, FM Salon Supplies Ltd, failed to pay a previous award made by the Workers' Relations Commission (WRC). 

The complainant alleges that this was further discrimination on the grounds of victimisation. 

The labour court was supplied with medical evidence showing that the complainant satisfies the criteria for disability and  had “a significant deterioration in his mental health, due to work-related stress.” 

Furthermore, it was proven that Mr O’Doherty, who never had issues raised about his work performance, was “treated less favourably” than the younger salesman. 

The complainant disclosed the nature of his mental health disability in the hopes that he would no longer be treated less favourably. 

However, the complainant was suspended from his employment before the WRC hearing, following an incident when the complainant approached the respondent asking whether they intended to resolve the WRC complaint of unpaid wages. 

The respondent yelled at the complainant and sent an email which suspended him from employment with immediate effect. 

Following a cancelled WRC Hearing on August 15 2023, the complainant contacted the respondent and a meeting was arranged for August 21, 2023. This suspension until the rearranged meeting with the respondent was evidence of “unfavourable treatment”, as the comparator (the younger worker in question) was not subjected to such suspension.

Moreover, it was contended that the complainant disclosed his long-standing mental health disability to the respondent in the hope that he would no longer be subjected to “humiliating and differential treatment.” However, it occurred in a meeting a week later, “in the most humiliating manner.” 

It was submitted that the complainant has satisfied the test for discrimination under the Acts as he has proven on the balance of probabilities that he was treated less favourably than his comparator because of his age and disability. 

In relation to the pay disparity, the respondent gave no evidence at the hearing to refute the allegation.  

WRC adjudication officer, Mr Shay Henry, concluded that the complainant was discriminated against on the grounds of his age and awarded the maximum of two years' compensation.