The Workplace Relations Commission has ordered An Garda Siochána to pay €65,000 to a sergeant injured in the line of duty who said he was left to “sit and rot” when a new superintendent confined him to office work.
Upholding the sergeant’s disability discrimination claim in a decision published on Thursday, a WRC adjudicator said the superintendent “should have spoken to his predecessors”, who had supported the complainant in carrying out his duties.
Sgt David Haughney, who secured the award, was said to be “nearly in tears” at an October 2019 meeting when Supt Adrian Gamble of Midleton Garda station told him he would be banned from driving for work, wearing his uniform in public and working as a public order trainer.
Sgt Haughney, who returned to work in 2015 after losing 70 per cent of the sight in his left eye following an assault on duty by a man with a rock the year before, had brought claims under the Employment Equality Act 1998 against An Garda Siochána, accusing the force of exposing him to discriminatory harassment and failing to give him reasonable accommodation.
Apple MacBook Pro M4 review: A great option, but only if you actually need the power of the Pro
Why I’m happy not to be an alpha male
Dave Hannigan: Katie Taylor’s presence lends a modicum of dignity to sporting farrago
The Music Quiz: Harry Styles sings about what type of restaurant on his 2022 album Harry’s House?
Despite his injury, he continued to enjoy a “happy” career as a roads policing sergeant, public order trainer and tactical advisor under the command of three different superintendents in Midleton from his return to work in 2015 up to 2019, Sgt Haughney said.
That ended after he took medical leave for treatment of a detached retina in his injured eye in 2019 and was blocked from performing public order training duties and driving for work by Supt Gamble following his return from the surgery that autumn, the tribunal was told.
Under cross-examination later on the same point by the complainant’s solicitor, Michael Hegarty, the superintendent said: “I didn’t see Dave upset. I could see he was in shock. I didn’t see any tears.”
After that, Sgt Haughney said he was then transferred to work for 11 months in a former telephone exchange which served as the traffic office at Midleton Garda station and said he was repeatedly denied permission to attend training events or work as a tactical advisor.
Sgt Haughney said he was left to “sit and rot” in the traffic office, which Insp O’Connor described as “like going into a cell”, a description contested by the State and Supt Gamble.
The tribunal heard that of 10 internal complaints by Sgt Haughney initially rejected by the force, one was upheld on appeal to an assistant commissioner relating to the meeting on April 15th, 2020.
The matter was not considered to be of a nature warranting criminal or disciplinary proceedings against the superintendent, the tribunal was told, but Supt Gamble was ordered to complete a training course in response.
In a closing submission, State counsel Declan Harmon said there was a “challenge” for Supt Gamble in implementing the “stark advice” of the Garda CMO in Sgt Haughney’s “best interests”.
In his decision, WRC adjudicator Jim Dolan wrote that the evidence of the Garda chief medical officer, Dr Richard Quigley, was “most telling” – noting that a return to work for Sgt Haughney after being passed fit was “conditional on local management determining if it had available duties” without a foreseeable risk of confrontation.
Mr Dolan wrote his view was that Supt Gamble had in fact “withdrawn” reasonable accommodations afforded to Sgt Haughney by his previous commanding officers.
Ruling Sgt Haughney’s discrimination claim “well-founded”, Mr Dolan awarded €65,000 in compensation.
Mr Dolan also urged Sgt Haughney to accept as “genuine” a statement to the tribunal from the force recognising Sgt Haughney’s “loyalty and diligence” and commending his “unwavering” commitment to his duties in the wake of the 2014 assault on duty.
“An Garda Síochána is fully committed to utilising the skills and competencies of the complainant as a highly experienced Sergeant for the remainder of his career. The respondent is also committed to ensuring that the complainant has a fulfilling and meaningful role,” the statement concluded.