Cleaner who smuggled phone into mental hospital loses unfair dismissal case
A cleaner who was sacked after smuggling a mobile phone into an institution for prisoners with mental disorders has lost a case for unfair dismissal against her former employer.
Lina Leliugiene worked for Derrycourt Cleaning Specialists Limited at the National Forensic Mental Health Services in Portrane, which also accommodates those found not guilty of crimes by reason of insanity.
An adjudication hearing of the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) was told that there was 'airport-like security' at the hospital, which was described as 'a facility for mentally ill patients and prisoners'.
Phones and other contraband items have to be placed in secure lockers before cleaning staff present themselves at security and enter the facility.
However, Ms Leliugiene, who is from Lithuania, admitted smuggling a mobile phone into a restricted area of the hospital and taking photographs in May 2023.
She claimed to be taking pictures of areas that weekend staff had failed to clean properly, and argued that she had acted out of frustration as grievances about this issue had not been acted upon.
Ms Leliugiene was given a final written warning following a disciplinary investigation into the incident and continued in employment until February 2024, when she emailed an area manager accusing a colleague of taking drugs and forging documents.
No evidence was found to substantiate these allegations, and the subject of the complaint told management that Ms Leliugiene had handed her an 'intimidatory' note accusing her of committing a crime.
The colleague said she was afraid of Ms Leliugiene to the extent that it had affected her health. The complainant was suspended on March 3, 2024 pending a formal investigation.
The WRC heard that she had sent an email to her area manager, stating: 'I want to ask. Because I can't understand how a person like [her] who is addicted to strong drugs, can still work here after falsifying a lot of documents?'
Ms Leliugiene was also accused of 'gossiping' with co-workers and nurses at the National Forensic Mental Health Service about her colleague's alleged drug addiction.
At a subsequent disciplinary hearing, an assistant regional manager for the company concluded that Ms Leliugiene had exhibited 'malicious intent' and 'complete disregard for the dignity and respect' of her colleague.
She said her conduct had been inappropriate and unacceptable, and she was dismissed on May 8, 2024. The decision was upheld following an appeal by Ms Leliugiene.
The complainant clarified that, by 'strong drugs', she had meant prescription drugs, recalling that she had given her Tramadol painkillers once when she had a sore back.
Ms Leliugiene claimed that she had a bad reaction to this medication, losing consciousness and requiring CPR from a colleague. She had to spend a week in Beaumont Hospital afterwards, she added. The Labour Court and Workplace Relations Commission offices on Lansdowne Road (Image: Google Maps)
She could not recall the date when this allegedly occurred, however, and told the WRC that she had not reported the incident to her employer.
In her decision, WRC adjudication officer Catherine Byrne said Ms Leliugiene had been wrong to take concerns over cleaning standards into her own hands by smuggling a phone into the hospital.
This was a 'serious breach of security protocols', and the final written warning she received in response had been justified, she added.
The 'tendency' to take matters into her own hands was repeated when she acted 'in an intimidating manner' towards her colleague, Ms Byrne said.
'I have considered all the evidence and I am satisfied that there were substantial grounds for the dismissal of the complainant and that any reasonable employer in the same circumstances would have dismissed her,' she said.
Ms Byrne further found that the procedures followed by her former employer had been fair 'in all respects', and concluded that the complaint of unfair dismissal was therefore not well founded.
Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest news from the Irish Mirror direct to your inbox: Sign up here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
5 days ago
- Irish Times
WRC finds in favour of dismissed employee who endured ‘deplorable' treatment from betting company
A service desk engineer dismissed by bookmaker Bar One Racing for alleged poor attendance and timekeeping was subject to 'deplorable' treatment by the company, the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has found. The company conducted a 'masterclass in how not to convene a disciplinary meeting' as it dealt with Liam Kyle, who initially worked on a part-time basis before being made permanent in October 2023, said WRC adjudication officer Pat Brady. Mr Kyle, who said he believed he did good work for the company, was called to an initial meeting last September at which it was put to him he had been absent on 16 occasions. He accepted there were absences but was not sure how many and had not considered it an issue until the meeting. A document stating the number as 16 was put to him and he was told that if he did not sign it, his employment could be terminated. He said he signed it under duress. READ MORE He said there were a couple of other meetings he considered to be informal and though the company said he was given a letter of warning, he said he did not recall seeing it and had certainly not been given a copy. Mr Kyle did not initially realise he was the subject of disciplinary proceedings but was dismissed at a meeting in January. He said he found alternative work five weeks later. In his decision on the case, Mr Brady described the conduct of the hearing into the matter as 'somewhat extraordinary' due to the company's attitude. Represented by two members of its HR department, he said Bar One Racing failed to produce the relevant staff members as witnesses, did not make written submissions and demonstrated complete confusion with regard to the conduct of the meetings Mr Kyle was obliged to attend. 'The respondent did not apparently consider it necessary to submit any relevant documents in evidence from which I draw the obvious conclusions in respect of the burden of proof,' he said. It was 'fatal' to the employer's case, he said, that Mr Kyle was not given a copy of the written warning 'if indeed it ever existed'. 'It seems probable that no such warning was administered on the date claimed and in any event, the complainant should have been given a copy of it formally,' Mr Brady said. 'It is rare these days to encounter such a complete repertoire of gross breaches of fair procedure and of a worker's rights.' Based on Mr Kyle's earning of €540 per week, and the fact there was no ongoing loss due to him having found new work, he ordered that Bar One pay him €2,700 in compensation.
Sunday World
11-06-2025
- Sunday World
Catering supervisor sacked over racial abuse loses WRC case: ‘How can I be racist?'
FAIR FIRING | 'I think the most serious part for me was that it made me out to be racist. One person said that when we were up in the A&E that I said: 'You're not Irish, you're black'. Workplace Relations Commission. Annette Ryan was dismissed from her part-time job as shift supervisor on an evening catering team at Waterford Hospital in September 2023 following bullying, harassment and racial abuse complaints from four of her subordinates. She wholly denied all of the allegations made against her, including complaints that she decided to change one worker's name to 'Tom' because she 'didn't speak his 'lingo',' and that she insulted another worker with references to their 'fat ass'. In a decision published today, a Workplace Relations Commission adjudicator concluded Ms Ryan's ex-employer, Campbell Catering Ltd, trading as Aramark, came to 'credible and reasonable conclusions' in a disciplinary process, and found that her sacking was 'fair in the circumstances'. At an online WRC hearing in March this year, Brian Joyce of the Irish Business and Employers' Confederation (IBEC), appearing for Aramark, said Ms Ryan's manager, Marcin Skrzypczak was approached by a worker in July 2023 who complained of 'bullying and discrimination'. Three more workers also came forward with complaints, and Ms Ryan was suspended pending an investigation, the tribunal was told. Workplace Relations Commission. News in 90 Seconds - June 11th Questioning Ms Ryan at an online hearing in March this year, WRC adjudicator Gaye Cunningham said: 'There were a number of serious allegations made against you. Is it your case that you just said this didn't happen? Did you think they all made it up, or what?' 'I think the most serious part for me was that it made me out to be racist. One person said that when we were up in the A&E that I said: 'You're not Irish, you're black', or something like that. That wasn't the case at all, I'm not a bit like that, that's what I said to them,' Ms Ryan said. 'You think he made that up, is it?' Ms Cunningham asked. 'The person who said it, made it up? Of course he did,' Ms Ryan said. These were addressed with the complainant at an investigation meeting in August 2023, the WRC decision recorded. Ms Ryan was dismissed the following month. "How can I be racist? I've worked with these people for 13 years," she told the WRC earlier this year. Her evidence was that she had worked with 'people from Nigeria, China, everywhere' at Waterford Hospital and was 'not a bit like that'. Her manager, Mr Skrzypczak, told the tribunal: 'I didn't feed anyone [anything] to go forward. People started coming to me, and as a site manager, I am responsible to act,' he added. Company disciplinary officer, Vladislava Tsapova, told the hearing she considered the workers' complaints against Ms Ryan 'genuine'. 'They were people who were genuinely afraid of a person who was in a supervisory position,' she said, adding that Ms Ryan offered neither any explanation for her behaviour nor any mitigating factors. Read more Brian Joyce of IBEC, who appeared for Aramark, submitted: 'The complainant was afforded a fair and impartial determination of the issues. Any allegation the process was flawed is denied.' Ms Cunningham noted Ms Ryan's 'denial of the allegations at all stages' and her stated belief that she was 'set up' -- but concluded the employer had come to 'credible and reasonable conclusions in the disciplinary process'. 'Had [Ms Ryan] accepted or shown some acknowledgement or remorse… the penalty may have been less harsh,' she wrote. 'The dismissal of the complainant indicates that racial abuse and bullying in the workplace will not be tolerated by any reasonable employer,' she added. The adjudicator dismissed Ms Ryan's complaint and ruled her sacking 'fair in the circumstances'. In evidence to the WRC in March, Aramark regional manager, Stephen Power, said he decided Ms Ryan had a case to answer when he met her on August 17 for an investigation meeting, he said. Ms Ryan offered no explanations when he presented her with the statements and responded with denials, he added. Ms Tsapova said she chaired the disciplinary meeting with Ms Ryan on August 30, 2023. She said Ms Ryan offered neither any mitigating factors nor any explanations when the investigation findings were put to her. She decided on the balance of probabilities that Ms Ryan had committed gross misconduct, with immediate dismissal given as a sanction on September 15, 2023, the WRC heard. The tribunal was told the sanction was upheld on appeal by a senior manager.
Irish Times
09-06-2025
- Irish Times
Baker who alleged he was subjected to racial slur in Polish wins €4,000
A baker has won €4,000 over being subjected to a racial slur in Polish by a colleague nearly six years ago. The award was made in a set of rulings published on Monday regarding a workplace dispute that arose in the spring of 2019. The worker, a black French man, alleged he was being bullied by predominantly Polish colleagues at an unidentified food and drinks company 'because he does not speak Polish'. The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) rejected various complaints of his alleging discrimination in breach of the Employment Equality Act 1998 on the grounds of race and disability. However, it found against the employer in respect of the racial slur incident in June 2019. READ MORE The worker gave evidence at a series of adjudication hearings, saying he 'felt threatened and isolated at work' during a period in early 2019 and felt he was suffering discrimination because he was 'black and did not speak Polish'. The worker said 'nothing was done' after he complained to his bosses in February 2019. The company's position was that it facilitated the worker by changing the start time of his shift and later changing his work location. It had also ordered his Polish colleagues to translate all work-related conversations to English, the tribunal was told. The complainant's further evidence was that after his transfer to the new work location he was subject to 'a particularly offensive and derogatory racial slur which was conveyed to him in Polish' on June 23rd, 2019. The worker who made the remark – which was not recorded in the tribunal's published decisions – left the employment the following day. The worker told the tribunal he 'did not know what it meant' until it was explained to him by a third party some months later, after which he filed his second complaint with the WRC. A head chef who gave evidence on behalf of the employer said 'nobody was subject to racial abuse' and that the workplace has 'zero tolerance' for bullying and harassment. The employer's position was that the complainant 'did not react well' when performance issues were raised with him. 'His response was to claim that he was being discriminated against and racially abused,' the company's representative submitted, adding that the firm had 'gone to great lengths' to support him. Adjudicator Andrew Heavey noted the accusation was 'vehemently denied' in the company's investigation process. However, he accepted the sworn evidence of the worker on the balance of probabilities. He wrote that despite the 'bona fides' and 'significant efforts' made by the employer to support the worker and address his complaints, it was still vicariously liable for the actions of its staff. He found the complainant was 'harassed on the race ground' on or about June 23rd, 2019, and directed the company to pay €4,000 in compensation for the discrimination. He rejected all other claims by the worker under the Employment Equality Act. Mr Heavey anonymised his decisions on the basis 'information of a sensitive nature relating to the complainant', which he believes 'deserves privacy'. He noted that when he held his final hearing into the claims last November, the complainant remained an employee of the firm and there had been 'no further issues'.
