Teacher sacked on professional incompetence grounds loses unfair dismissal claim
This follows Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) Adjudicator Emile Daly finding that teacher Ruth Lydon was not unfairly dismissed by the Board of Management (BOM) of St. Ciaran's National School, Fuerty, Co Roscommon after a marathon WRC process.
Ms Daly made her ruling after 10 WRC hearing days held over a two-and-a-half-year period from October 17 2022 to May 12 of this year.
Ms Lydon worked as a Special Education Teacher (SET) and was dismissed from her role by the school BOM in September 2021.
St. Ciaran's National School is a 60-pupil, three-teacher school. Ms Lydon started teaching at the school in 2002 and in 2010 she became the main SET.
In her evidence, school principal Rosita Murphy told the WRC that in October 2017, Ms Lydon had stopped communicating with the other staff and children's parents.
Ms Murphy said that in a small school in a local community, the situation became untenable. Parents made complaints about discipline in Ms Lydon's class.
Ms Murphy said that in November 2017, there was ongoing evidence that Ms Lydon was unable to discipline or manage her classrooms.
Outlining disciplinary issues in the classroom in February 2018, Ms Murphy alleged that children were hiding in the toilet without Ms Lydon noticing and children were walking around the classroom during class.
Ms Murphy further alleged that in early March 2018, more complaints were received from parents, books were thrown in the classroom and belongings of children were rifled by other children, which caused upset.
Ms Murphy stated that misbehaviour was met with weak and inconsistent responses such as 'Don't do that again, good boy'.
Ms Murphy said that the issues went beyond discipline where Ms Lydon would concentrate on one child while the rest of the class were all talking and misbehaving.
Ms Murphy also alleged that children were raising their voices, on one occasion chanting 'fight, fight, fight,', which Ms Lydon failed to control and children were not doing their work during class.
Ms Murphy alleged that on one occasion, a child used inappropriate language, using the words 'f**king bitch' and Ms Lydon reprimanded the child in front of the whole class, saying 'you can't use words like 'you f**king bitch''.
Ms Murphy stated that Ms Lydon did not appear to think that there was anything wrong about her repeating these words in front of the children.
A child's project was destroyed by another child and when Ms Murphy allegedly addressed this with Ms Lydon, she said it was not up to her to Pritt-stick.
Ms Murphy alleged in March 2018, Ms Lydon took a day off 'to do timetables'.
Ms Murphy initiated a competency process for Ms Lydon in January 2023 as part of the Circular Process and in May 2018, commenced a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) around five areas - Classroom discipline; Standard of Teaching; Engagement with Pupils; Engagement with Parents and Staff and Planning of Classwork.
As part of the PIP, Ms Murphy found that 'Under Poor Engagement with Pupils', Ms Murphy said in response to a question from a child, Ms Lydon said she was 'allowed wear slippers because she was an adult and could wear what she wants'.
Ms Murphy found three of Ms Lydon's pupils sitting in the staff room, having asked her if they could go to the toilets. Ms Murphy found that there was no improvement during the PIP.
Peadar O'Muiri was appointed by the Department of Education Chief Inspector to attend the school to assess Ms Lydon's professional competence as part of an external review in the Circular Process.
Mr O'Muiri made three inspection visits and found that Ms Lydon was not performing at an acceptable level of professional competence in her role.
In her findings, Ms Daly stated that given Mr O'Muiri's findings, that Ms Lydon's work was weak in all areas of competency that he assessed, it is hard to see how the Board Of Management (BOM) had any option other than to respond in the most serious way – which was to proceed to disciplinary action.
A Department of Education circular 49/2018 provides a statutory mechanism for a school to suspend and/or dismiss a teacher.
Ms Daly stated that 'there is a widely-held misconception that a teacher cannot be dismissed from their teaching post. But this is not so, a teacher may be dismissed if there are appropriate grounds to do so and if Circular 49/2018 is followed'.
Ms Daly stated that given the length of time that the Circular Process took - three and a half years - she has little doubt that the impact that this process had on Ms Lydon, the school management, the children attending this small school and their parents "was difficult, attritional and damaging'.
Ms Daly said that she was satisfied that, over time, Ms Lydon did not improve to the level that was required to provide an appropriate education to the children in her care. The school principal said there was ongoing evidence that the teacher was unable to discipline or manage her classrooms (Image: Colin Keegan, Collins Agency, Dublin)
Ms Daly concluded that much time was spent on recording what Ms Lydon regarded to be unfair treatment and making bullying allegations against the School Principal, Ms Murphy, and insufficient time was spent actively listening to the critical feedback that she was receiving from Ms Murphy, her line manager, and reflecting on how she needed to improve the standard of her teaching.
Ms Daly stated that if there is anything the BOM could be criticised for, it is for allowing the process to go on as long as it did.
Ms Daly stated that she was satisfied that the School Principal, Ms Murphy, carried out her duties in accordance with the terms of Stage 1 of the Circular and until she correctly disengaged from the process having completed her Stage 2 report to the BOM.
Ms Daly stated that Department Inspector Mr O'Muiri observed in his report a failure by Ms Lydon to engage with the children, inadequate support plans, inadequate targets or measured progress, disorganisation, not getting through the teaching that was required, not engaging with pupils, reading from text books while children became disengaged.
Ms Daly stated that Mr O'Muiri's findings 'were stark' and Ms Lydon failed every competency that she was assessed on.
Ms Daly stated that she was satisfied that the decision by the BOM to dismiss Ms Lydon by letter dated 18 March 2021 was within a band of reasonable responses to the uncontested findings of the Inspector.
The BOM decision was upheld by a Disciplinary Appeals Panel (DAP) made up of an independent chair appointed by the Education Minister, a representative of a management body and a trade union representative.
Ms Daly said that she was satisfied that the Circular Process was adhered to by both the school and the Department of Education.
The WRC hearing heard that Ms Lydon has obtained other teaching work since her dismissal.
At hearing, Ms Lydon said that she thought the PIP was a complete nonsense and Ms Murphy's report on the PIP was also a nonsense.
Ms Lydon said that she considers the whole Circular process was prejudged by Ms Murphy and the BOM and that she didn't really stand a chance of remaining in her post from the point that it was started.
In the case, the BOM was represented by Cathy McGready BL instructed by Lorcan Maule of Mason Hayes and Curran, while Ms Lydon was represented by Niamh Ni Leathlobhair BL and Mark O'Connell BL, instructed by Dalippe Lalloo, Lalloo & Co Solicitors.
Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest news from the Irish Mirror direct to your inbox: Sign up here.
The Irish Mirror's Crime Writers Michael O'Toole and Paul Healy are writing a new weekly newsletter called Crime Ireland. Click here to sign up and get it delivered to your inbox every week
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTÉ News
6 days ago
- RTÉ News
Unregistered apprentice mechanic denied pay wins order for €5,000 in wages
A motor garage which put an unregistered apprentice mechanic to work for three months without wages has been directed to pay him €5,418 after failing to successfully argue it was entitled to pay him less than two-fifths of the minimum wage. The worker, Moeez Ahmad, secured the award on foot of a complaint under the Payment of Wages Act 1991 after the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) rejected the position of his employer, Gorey Automotive Services, that it only owed him €4.75 an hour for the three months he spent working there. At a hearing last month, Mr Ahmad told the tribunal he did some unpaid work experience at the garage in July 2024 and went on to take up full-time employment on 30 September. He said was that he worked 9am to 6pm for 59 days between 30 September 2024 and 6 January 2025, but "was not paid for the hours worked". He said his employer told him he "would get paid when he was registered as an apprentice" but not for the "trial period". Adnan Farooq, who appeared on behalf of the respondent, told the WRC the deal with Mr Ahmad was that he "would be paid cash up until the time he was registered as an apprentice with SOLAS" at the apprentice rate of pay. Mr Farooq said the appropriate rate for an apprentice motor mechanic was €190 a week – and that he "would not have hired [Mr Ahmad]" if it meant paying minimum wage, but rather "someone with experience". He added that the business intended to "backpay the complainant at the apprentice rate" and that the parties had "parted ways" when Mr Ahmad sought the national minimum wage. The tribunal heard the garage applied to register with SOLAS in October that year, and that an advisor from the State training agency visited the workplace to advise on requirements. However, Mr Farooq stated that the registration forms were "misdirected in the post", causing a delay to Mr Ahmad's registration. Mr Farooq said he accepted that the business owed Mr Ahmad wages, but did not agree they were payable at the national minimum wage – outlining to the tribunal that it intended to pay the complainant his back wages at the apprentice rate. In her decision on the case, adjudicator Kara Turner noted that it was "common case that there were no wages paid" to Mr Ahmad from 30 September 2024 to 6 January 2025. She noted the garage's position that an apprentice motor mechanic was paid €190 a week for a five-day week working 9am to 6pm with an hour of unpaid breaks during the day. "This equates to €4.75 per hour," she wrote. The minimum wage applicable to Mr Ahmad, according to his age, was €11.43 an hour up to the end of 2024, and rose to €12.15 in 2025, she added. Ms Turner wrote that while the National Minimum Wage Act 2000 exempted apprentices, Mr Ahmad had not been registered as one. She added that any issue about the exchange of registration forms with SOLAS was "immaterial". "The real issue is that I can find no lawful basis to support the respondent's position that an hourly pay rate of €4.75, or other apprentice rate of pay, was the properly payable rate," she wrote. She found that Mr Ahmad was entitled to the national minimum wage applicable to his age for his time in employment with the garage, awarding him €5,418 in compensation on that basis.
Irish Times
6 days ago
- Irish Times
Beauty salon must pay €1,500 to Traveller mother and daughters for discrimination
A beauty salon has been ordered to pay a Traveller woman and her daughters €500 each in compensation for discrimination after insisting they pay cash up front for their treatments. The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) upheld complaints under the Equal Status Act 2000 by the family against the unidentified beauty salon. In evidence, the mother, Ms A, said she and her daughters went to the salon as a 'birthday treat' for one of the girls and on arrival was told by a hairdresser that the business would 'only accept cash'. She said she asked about the full cost then the owner called her to the counter and showed her a sum on a calculator. Ms A said she asked for an itemised breakdown of the figure, upon which the owner became 'infuriated'. READ MORE Ms A said the owner struck the counter with two hands and said 'something to the effect' of 'Do you want it for free? Are you trying to rob me?'. The complainant said the owner also threatened to call the police and continued to be 'rude and aggressive' to the point that one of her daughters became upset and suggested they leave. Ms A said it was made clear she would have to pay up front for all the procedures and that one of the hairdressers also suggested she 'run across the road to the ATM'. She said that before she went out the hairdresser told her the reason the owner had behaved as she had was because a group of girls had been in the week before and failed to pay for procedures. The hairdresser said this group were 'also Travellers', Ms A said. Ms A said that, having paid up front as requested, other customers in line behind her were served before her. It was 'so obvious' this was happening that another customer noticed one of her daughters was 'visibly upset' and offered to let the girl go ahead, Ms A said. 'Other customers who were not members of the Traveller community were not asked to pay for their treatments up front,' Ms A said, adding two other customers confirmed this to her. Adjudication officer Orla Jones noted the failure of the business's management to attend a hearing on the case last February. In her decision published on Thursday, Ms Jones said she was satisfied Ms A and her daughters were subjected to less favourable treatment at the salon due to their membership of the Traveller Community. She upheld the three complaints, awarding Ms A and daughters Ms M and Ms K compensation of €500 each. Ms Jones anonymised all three of her decisions on the cases, also redacting the name of the business, to protect identities of the two underage complainants. In a statement afterwards from the Free Legal Advice Centres , Ms A welcomed the decision, saying she and he daughter 'did not take these cases for money'. 'As a mother, I want my girls to know that people cannot and should not treat them badly because they come from the Traveller community,' she said . FLAC chief executive Eilis Barry said: 'The family showed great bravery and resilience in taking these complaints. 'Unfortunately, there is no legal aid for victims of discrimination who take cases to the WRC. This means it is impossible for many people to challenge discrimination and to access compensation for its effects.' Ms Barry called for the removal of the 'blanket ban on legal aid for cases heard by tribunals like the WRC' and more support for legal services for the Travelling community and 'other groups with high levels of legal need'.
The Irish Sun
03-08-2025
- The Irish Sun
Teenager convicted for not insuring surprise birthday gift car before receiving it
A TEENAGER has received a criminal conviction for not being insured for her car – before she had received it for her 18th birthday. The waitress, from Poole in Dorset, was gifted a Fiat for her landmark birthday, but mistakenly did not insure it immediately. 1 A teenager was slapped with a criminal conviction for failing to have her car insured Credit: Getty The teen explained in a letter to Ipswich magistrates court that she never drove the car as she had not received her licence at the time of the offence. However, the DVLA charged her with keeping an uninsured vehicle and brought a criminal prosecution over the unpaid bill. She pleaded guilty to the offence, which took place a few weeks before her 18th birthday. 'My family got the car for me as my 18th birthday present," she wrote. read more in motors "I was still 17 at the time of the offence and had not actually been given the keys to the car and was not aware that it would be mine.' She added that she and her dad have reading difficulties, and only realised the seriousness of what was happening when a friend read her the official letter. She continued: 'I have never used the car as I have still not passed my driving test. 'My dad is willing to pay the fine for me as he thinks this is his fault. Most read in Motors 'He receives Universal Credit and PIP for his mental health, and I have just finished college and currently have a part-time job as a waitress on the minimum wage for an 18-year-old. 'I was a good student in school and college studying art and have never been in any trouble in my life. Daily Money News "We just misunderstood the letter, I thought it said I had to SORN it or pay a fine if it doesn't get sorted. 'I am very sorry.' A magistrate slapped the teen with a 12-month conditional discharge instead of a fine. But she chose not to send the case back to the DVLA for an extra public interest check. The teen will now have a criminal conviction, and must also pay a £20 court fee. It comes after news that one in six drivers admitted they have been behind the wheel without insurance. A poll of 2,000 adults found 24 per cent of these did so only on a short journey, believing cover wasn't necessary. A fifth unknowingly committed the offence when their policy had expired, but 17 per cent did it as they wanted to save money. And 15 percent drove uninsured because renewing their policy was a life admin task they kept putting off renewing. Learner drivers are twice as likely to drive uninsured compared to those with a full driving license (37 per cent). James Armstrong, a young driver expert at flexible car insurer 'It's worrying to see so many people are driving uninsured, especially as there are affordable options available for short-term cover.'
