Annual Report 2004.pdf - Equality Authority

attack caused by low blood sugar levels.He was taken out to the back of therestaurant and given a drink. After afew minutes he declared himself fit toreturn to work but the manager insistedthat he go home. He was asked to comein early the next day.The next day the manager told him that“it was nothing to do with last night”but that he would have to let him gobecause the restaurant was not busyenough and as he was the last in, hewould have to be first to go. Theclaimant was shocked and left therestaurant. After speaking to his wife hebegan to feel that the real reason for hisdismissal was his hypoglycaemicattack. He then returned to therestaurant to ask for pay in lieu ofnotice and any holiday pay he mayhave been entitled to. The respondentrefused to give him any pay andreferred to the fact that his own brotherwas epileptic and could not work in thefamily business either.Two weeks later the claimant noticedthat the restaurant had placed anadvertisement in the local paperseeking waiting staff. The respondentinsisted that the claimant had beenfound to be unsuitable for the job dueto his lateness, abrupt manner and poorwaiting skills.The Labour Court found that theclaimant had been discriminatedagainst on the grounds of his disabilityand ordered that he be paid €4,000 incompensation. It did not accept that theproximity in time between thecomplainant’s diabetic incident and hisdismissal within 24 hours was merecoincidence.2. The claimant was refused employmentas a driver/clerk with his employerbecause of a mild hearing impairment.The employer made no attempt toprovide reasonable accommodation.Proceedings were lodged with the ODEIand following receipt of the EqualityAuthority’s submission on behalf of theclaimant, the respondents agreed tosettle the case for €15,000.3. A claim alleging discrimination on thedisability ground was resolved by asatisfactory explanation when thecompany provided medical evidencethat it had followed proper procedureand could show there were cleargrounds for not giving the position tothe complainant. The claimant wassatisfied with the explanation given; itshowed that the company had done allthat it could do, not to discriminate onthe grounds of his hearing disability.4. The complainant is registered as adisabled person. He has “Sensitivity50 • Equality Authority Annual Report 2004