Latest news with #constructivedismissal
Irish Times
22-07-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
‘Burned out' bra saleswoman wins €15,800 for constructive dismissal
A lingerie saleswoman who said she was forced to quit her job of nearly 20 years over the health impact of workplace stress at due to a 'toxic' work environment at a Dublin department store has won €15,800 for constructive dismissal. Karrin Breslin was awarded the sum on foot of a complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 against Chantelle Lingerie Ltd, the operator of a concession in the lingerie department of the unidentified store. The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) awarded Ms Breslin her full losses after ruling that the international lingerie brand repudiated her contract of employment by failing to address grievances about understaffing and rostering while her health deteriorated over the course of two years. It was submitted on behalf of Ms Breslin – an employee of the brand since 2004 – that when the department store reopened in May 2021 following the Covid-19 lockdown, her section was down to 12 staff with just two full-time, compared with 10 full-timers out of 17 before the pandemic. READ MORE The tribunal heard Ms Breslin had moved from north Co Dublin to Co Wexford during the pandemic closure. She asked at that stage to be given a set working day of 9am to 5.30pm, she said. Her employer's response was that 'this was not a request that could be granted given the opening hours of the shop and the need for a fair departmental roster', the tribunal was told. The tribunal was told that the department store, rather than the lingerie brand, was responsible for setting the roster governing Ms Breslin's working hours. 'I feel my mental and physical health has deteriorated ... I don't have a good work/life balance and it's going to get worse due to the late closing times coming back again,' she wrote. Ms Breslin's case was that her job was made 'overwhelming and physically hard' because of these issues and that she began to experience anxiety, low mood, high blood pressure and gastrointestinal problems 'as a result of work-related stress'. Following a medical absence in June 2022, Ms Breslin again wrote to her employer and set out that because the department was so 'understaffed' that sales were being lost because customers were walking out without being served. Her employer's position was this was 'a commercial point and not a personal grievance'. Ms Breslin had seven periods of certified medical leave between January 2022 and the summer of 2023, the tribunal heard. In an exchange of emails with her employer during her fifth period of medical leave in June 2023, Ms Breslin said she believed her illness was 'work-related'. 'There are major obstacles stopping me from doing a good job and this has been going on for years. It's got far worse in the last 4 months and definitely having a negative impact on my working life due to a stressful and sometimes toxic work environment,' she wrote. In responding correspondence, she was told: 'I am hoping you can get to the bottom of your sickness so you feel better,' the WRC heard. The tribunal heard that Ms Breslin worked her last shift on 25th June 2023 and ultimately did not return to work before she tendered her resignation on 31st October that year. Chantelle's managing director, who gave evidence, said she had assumed Ms Breslin would return to her job when she got better and that her resignation 'was pleasant and made no mention of issues or other employees' behaviour'. When it was put to her in cross-examination that Ms Breslin had told her she was 'burned out', the managing director said she 'understood there was an issue' of work-related stress but that she 'did not relate this' to Ms Breslin's resignation. Asked what she had done to respond to the staffing issues raised by Ms Breslin, the managing director said these were 'a matter for the shop'. In her decision, adjudicator Patricia Owens wrote Ms Breslin had been raising 'serious concerns for her physical and mental health' starting in October 2021. While the managing director made efforts to resolve 'minor issues' for Ms Breslin around medical certs and annual leave, 'more complex matters' around roster problems and staff shortages 'were never addressed', Ms Owens wrote. 'I consider that the respondent failed in its duty of care to the complainant to protect her health, safety and wellbeing while at work,' Ms Owens wrote. She considered the firm's failure to respond adequately to amount to 'repudiation of contract', upholding Ms Breslin's unfair dismissal claim. Ms Owens awarded the claimant €15,800, her full losses for five months' unemployment. A further complaint of disability discrimination under the Employment Equality Act was ruled out of time by the Commission. Ms Breslin was represented by Aisling Irish of Parker Law Solicitors in the case, while human resources consultancy Tom Smyth and Associates appeared for the employer.
RNZ News
17-07-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
Wellington Live owner Graham Bloxham told to pay former worker almost $30k
Wellington mayoral candidate Graham Bloxham ordered to pay former worker $28,294. Photo: Supplied In Your Pocket Media, which operates the Wellington Live Facebook page, has been told to pay a former employee almost $30,000. Joseph Parr took the company to the Employment Relations Authority, complaining that he was constructively dismissed, unjustifiably disadvantaged and had wages owing to him. In Your Pocket Media was founded by Wellington mayoral candidate Graham Bloxham, who is the current director and shareholder. The company bought the Facebook page Wellington live in 2021. Parr was employed as head of digital marketing. He said Bloxham was a family friend who approached him. It was his first proper job in a media field. He started work on $30 an hour but was told that would increase to $32 in about May 2022. But he said he did not receive that increase; he was not given pay slips during his employment and his wages were not paid regularly. He said he was also subjected to humiliating treatment including jokes by Bloxham about his appearance. Parr said it was a toxic work environment and Bloxham's actions were not in line with what Parr believed the Wellington Live page was about. Parr told the Employment Relations Authority that he and some of his colleagues discovered their taxes appeared not to have been filed with Inland Revenue, even though the money had been deducted from their wages. When he raised this with Bloxham, he was told that it could be the case that the company was paying PAYE annually. Parr said this was the "straw that broke the camel's back" and resigned. Bloxham told Parr and another employee they were in breach of their agreement because they had shared information about the company and their own personal situations with IRD with each other. Parr went on to raise a personal grievance. Bloxham responded saying that Parr had abandoned his employment. Authority member Davinnia Tan said Parr gave evidence that Bloxham and his company's actions had caused him significant anxiety. He was also worried about his future employment prospects. Tan said the authority had been told the company would not participate in mediation, despite being directed to do so. It did not appear at a case management conference or an investigation meeting. Tan said the responses by Bloxham to Parr's concerns about the non-payment of PAYE were not of the calibre of a responsible or honest employer with oversight or who had made an inadvertent error. "These deductions were made on every wage payment for almost 45 weeks' of Mr Parr's employment with Pocket Media with no evidence of payment to the IRD of Mr Parr's PAYE taxes. "On the evidence available to the authority, the failure to pay the IRD from deductions made to Mr Parr's gross pay were deliberate. "There is no ambiguity that this constituted a breach of Pocket Media's duty of good faith as required under s 4 of the Act, which extend beyond obligations of trust and confidence. The financial mismanagement was deliberate and deceitful, which Pocket Media benefited from at the expense of Mr Parr." Parr's claim of unjustified constructive dismissal was successful. Tan said $5670 should have been paid as PAYE to Inland Revenue, but that had to be dealt with by the Commissioner of Inland Revenue. She said a copy of the determination would be sent to the department. She said the jobs that Parr took after leaving did not pay well. "During this time, he had to give up his flat due to an inability to continue rent payments and had to live with family. "In a desperate effort to ensure he was not completely reliant on family for his livelihood, he accepted any role that he was successful in attaining quickly so there was incoming money. "IRD records show that he earned a total of $7305.13 over the next three months. "The harm caused by Pocket Media in these circumstances has been significant on Mr Parr. "Having assessed Mr Parr's credibility and manner, the level of dejection and humiliation he felt from how his employment with Pocket Media ended was obvious." Tan said compensation of $20,000 was appropriate. He was also due $8294.87 in lost wages. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
17-07-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
Wellington Live owner told to pay former worker almost $30k
Wellington mayoral candidate Graham Bloxham ordered to pay former worker $28,294. Photo: Supplied In Your Pocket Media, which operates the Wellington Live Facebook page, has been told to pay a former employee almost $30,000. Joseph Parr took the company to the Employment Relations Authority, complaining that he was constructively dismissed, unjustifiably disadvantaged and had wages owing to him. In Your Pocket Media was founded by Wellington mayoral candidate Graham Bloxham, who is the current director and shareholder. The company bought the Facebook page Wellington live in 2021. Parr was employed as head of digital marketing. He said Bloxham was a family friend who approached him. It was his first proper job in a media field. He started work on $30 an hour but was told that would increase to $32 in about May 2022. But he said he did not receive that increase; he was not given pay slips during his employment and his wages were not paid regularly. He said he was also subjected to humiliating treatment including jokes by Bloxham about his appearance. Parr said it was a toxic work environment and Bloxham's actions were not in line with what Parr believed the Wellington Live page was about. Parr told the Employment Relations Authority that he and some of his colleagues discovered their taxes appeared not to have been filed with Inland Revenue, even though the money had been deducted from their wages. When he raised this with Bloxham, he was told that it could be the case that the company was paying PAYE annually. Parr said this was the "straw that broke the camel's back" and resigned. Bloxham told Parr and another employee they were in breach of their agreement because they had shared information about the company and their own personal situations with IRD with each other. Parr went on to raise a personal grievance. Bloxham responded saying that Parr had abandoned his employment. Authority member Davinnia Tan said Parr gave evidence that Bloxham and his company's actions had caused him significant anxiety. He was also worried about his future employment prospects. Tan said the authority had been told the company would not participate in mediation, despite being directed to do so. It did not appear at a case management conference or an investigation meeting. Tan said the responses by Bloxham to Parr's concerns about the non-payment of PAYE were not of the calibre of a responsible or honest employer with oversight or who had made an inadvertent error. "These deductions were made on every wage payment for almost 45 weeks' of Mr Parr's employment with Pocket Media with no evidence of payment to the IRD of Mr Parr's PAYE taxes. "On the evidence available to the authority, the failure to pay the IRD from deductions made to Mr Parr's gross pay were deliberate. "There is no ambiguity that this constituted a breach of Pocket Media's duty of good faith as required under s 4 of the Act, which extend beyond obligations of trust and confidence. The financial mismanagement was deliberate and deceitful, which Pocket Media benefited from at the expense of Mr Parr." Parr's claim of unjustified constructive dismissal was successful. Tan said $5670 should have been paid as PAYE to Inland Revenue, but that had to be dealt with by the Commissioner of Inland Revenue. She said a copy of the determination would be sent to the department. She said the jobs that Parr took after leaving did not pay well. "During this time, he had to give up his flat due to an inability to continue rent payments and had to live with family. "In a desperate effort to ensure he was not completely reliant on family for his livelihood, he accepted any role that he was successful in attaining quickly so there was incoming money. "IRD records show that he earned a total of $7305.13 over the next three months. "The harm caused by Pocket Media in these circumstances has been significant on Mr Parr. "Having assessed Mr Parr's credibility and manner, the level of dejection and humiliation he felt from how his employment with Pocket Media ended was obvious." Tan said compensation of $20,000 was appropriate. He was also due $8294.87 in lost wages. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Irish Times
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Irish Times
Ex-head of UN migrant office in Dublin ‘reassigned because of her behaviour in Ireland'
The former head of the United Nations ' migrant assistance bureau in Dublin was 'reassigned because of her behaviour in Ireland' after more than a dozen staff complaints and resignations, a tribunal has been told. The International Organisation for Migration (IOM) has told the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) it is invoking diplomatic immunity in response to a claim for constructive dismissal by Charlene Maleady, a senior employee who quit in 2023. Her lawyers have argued their client was knocked back so far in her career by retaliation and harassment from the IOM's former chief of mission in Ireland, Lalini Veerassamy, that the UN agency cannot avail of immunity as an international organisation in the case under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977. Giving evidence on Tuesday, Ms Maleady told the WRC that she worked her way up the ranks after joining as an intern in 2011, securing promotion to her €67,000-a-year job as national protection and programme officer. READ MORE In her statutory complaint to the tribunal, Ms Maleady wrote: 'The chief of mission got reassigned because of her behaviour in Ireland because, at this stage, 13 complaints had gone in, and they sent over a new chief of mission.' She said there was a 'significant' increase in working hours when Ms Veerassamy took over in Dublin in 2019, citing WhatsApp messages about work matters as early as 7am and as late as 11pm and late-night work 'becoming the norm'. 'You'd get messages Friday evening for what she wanted Saturday morning, and if you had a problem with it, she'd say: 'It's not how the international office would work. Staff were being put under pressure [and] being openly scolded,' she said. She said that after she made contact with a UN HR office in November or December 2020, the HR department phoned Ms Veerassamy and 'told her these issues had been flagged'. 'She called a meeting in January [2021], she said she knew who made them, they were unfounded, and she would address them within the mission,' Ms Maleady said. Ms Maleady said she had just secured promotion to a local management grade as national protection and programme officer and that since her appointment had been cleared by headquarters, the mission chief had to give it to her. However, Ms Maleady said Ms Veerassamy called her in and said that her agreed duties in the post were being changed, she said. She said that from that point onward she was 'increasingly excluded from activities in the office' and was left with a single project to run. Junior colleagues were 'actively encouraged to report me for things', 'allowed to speak to me however they wanted' and would 'reprimand me on calls', she said. She said the 'constant humiliation' only broke when Ms Veerassamy departed in May 2023. She said UN human resources in Geneva spoke to Ms Veerassamy informally 'to say she needed to pull back on her management style and be more cognisant of staff welfare'. 'In the meantime, I was linked in with the occupational health unit, who wrote a report on the Irish office. They'd serious concerns about what was going on ... they'd asked Geneva to step in and reel her in, effectively,' Ms Maleady said. Ms Maleady said when she took maternity leave between autumn 2021 and summer 2022, she saw that her role as national protection officer was advertised by the organisation. She found on her return that her desk – which she called 'the best seat in the house' – her staff, and her work had all been reassigned, except for a single project she managed, she said. 'You work so hard, and then to go from being top of your career to being nobody, effectively. [Colleagues] got told to keep away from me: I was a troublemaker, I was a liar, I had an agenda, that I was racist,' Ms Maleady said. She said she had hoped that when the new chief of mission in Ireland, Zuzana Vatralova, arrived in June 2023 that she would get back to where she was. Her evidence was that Ms Vatralova was clear that she would have to wait for new projects to come up and interview for them when they arose. 'I effectively was starting from scratch where I had to prove myself to a new chief of mission. I'd worked 11 years working my way up. I couldn't start from scratch. I was rock bottom, I could barely string a sentence together, and my confidence was gone,' she said. Ms Maleady said she had attempted to have her grievances addressed through various offices in the UN, including human resources, an internal ombudsperson, the UN ethics and conduct office, and eventually the Office of the Inspector General. She said she ultimately resigned in September 2023 and secured a position in the Irish Civil Service. The Office of the Inspector-General ultimately told her in April 2024 that it would not investigate her complaint of retaliation 'because I hadn't reported my grievance to my manager'. Adjudication officer Kara Turner noted that the IOM had not attended the hearing but had written to the WRC making a 'procedural immunity argument' based on a 2015 co-operation agreement between the State and the United Nations, which was covered by a statutory instrument. Cillian McGovern BL, appearing for the complainant instructed by Crushell & Co Solicitors, said the agreement did not confer 'absolute' immunity. He said his client spent 11 years 'building herself up' to a 'dream job' in international relations, only to face 'entirely retaliatory' behaviour from Ms Veerassamy and be reduced to a 'lowly position ... photocopying and answering the door beside the fire escape'. 'That takes the complainant into the position where her work was not truly touching the business of a foreign government,' Mr McGovern said. He said there had been 'no accountability' when his client pursued the matter through the UN's internal processes in the hope she might be reinstated. Ms Turner said she would write to the parties with her decision 'in due course', and closed the hearing.
RNZ News
14-07-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
Former IRD employee loses ERA claim following comments about free period products
A former Inland Revenue employee has lost her bid to claim unjustified disadvantage over free period products in the work bathroom. Photo: RNZ / Richard Tindiller A former Inland Revenue employee has lost her bid to claim unjustified disadvantage and constructive dismissal after making comments other workers found offensive. Christine Massof had worked for the department for 14 years. She was reprimanded after she made a comment on the intranet in response to news that the department would be providing period products in both male and female bathrooms. She posted: "This is awesome but a shame it took so long coming. And interesting, now that men can menstruate, free period products are available in IR bathrooms." Massof's manager, Leah Galbraith, became aware when the comment was reported to her by IR's rainbow network, which said some people were offended and upset. Galbraith met Massof to discuss the comments and set expectations for the future. She said it was not the first discussion of this type she had had with Massof about her need to be aware of the impact her comments could have on her colleagues. Massof denied that and said earlier incidents were different. Galbraith said the meeting went smoothly but Massof said she was not given much opportunity to speak. She was then given a letter headed "expectation of behaviour" which advised her that she should exercise discretion when expressing views, particularly when they could cause offence. When staff were reorganised, Massof began reporting to a different team leader. But she said the meeting with Galbraith had left her upset and anxious. She said after she returned from sick leave she was vulnerable and had been ostracised. She filed a statement of problem with the Employment Relations Authority saying she had been unjustifiably disadvantaged in her employment and Inland Revenue had not acted in good faith. She then resigned. Several months later, she raised a claim of unjustifiable constructive dismissal. She said the letter had disadvantaged her because it was disciplinary in nature, she did not have the opportunity for a support person, it affected her prospects for promotion, it silenced her and that Inland Revenue had imposed a bathroom policy on her without consultation. Authority member Claire English said the letter was not a disciplinary outcome and did not impose disciplinary consequences on Massof. "There is also nothing used in the requirements or expectations themselves to support the submission that this was a disciplinary matter. They may be described as requirements to treat colleagues respectfully in the workplace and to bear in mind that colleagues may have different views to yourself." She said Inland Revenue was entitled to set minimum standards of behaviour. "Insofar as Ms Massof complains that IR's provision of free sanitary products by IR in the bathrooms was an unjustified disadvantage, this claim cannot be made out. The provision of free product to all staff with no requirement for use or engagement by staff cannot be categorised as a disadvantage, much less an unjustified one." She said the submission that the department had a new policy of allowing staff to use bathrooms of their choice amounted to unjustified disadvantage was also not borne out by the evidence. "Ms Massof worked for IR for some 14 years. She was not able to explain when or how this policy was either implemented or changed by IR. "For a claim of constructive dismissal to succeed, the dismissal must occur at the initiative of the employer. Ms Massof's evidence is that she did not want to continue in the workplace, not due to any breach of obligation by her employer, but because she fundamentally disagreed with workplace changes over a period of many years, and no longer wished to work there as a result. This does not amount to a constructive dismissal." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
