The former live-in superintendent at a housing complex for older people in Northern Ireland has won €10,000 compensation for being ousted in the wake of a “mutiny” by its residents over her role in enforcing the Covid-19 lockdown.
The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) found the complex’s owner, the Charles Sheils Charity, had the problem of an “unruly and unmanageable community” at its houses in Killough, Co Down, who would not back down even though an independent investigator found no basis for their complaints against the superintendent.
However, after more complaints came in, the charity governors put the worker, Cathy Moore, back under investigation and then sacked her in September 2021 in a process the tribunal found had been “flawed and offended the principles of natural justice”.
Ms Moore was “entirely blameless” in the affair, the WRC concluded, upholding her complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977.
The best crime fiction of 2024: Robert Harris, Jane Casey, Joe Thomas, Kellye Garrett, Stuart Neville and many more
We’re heading for the second biggest fiscal disaster in the history of the State
Housing in Ireland is among the most expensive and most affordable in the EU. How does that happen?
Ceann comhairle election key task as 34th Dáil convenes for first time
The worker said she had been the superintendent at the Killough Charles Sheils houses since 2013, enjoying a €4,658-a-year allowance and tied accommodation worth €600-€700 a month with utility bills paid.
The complex was built in the mid-19th century by the charity, which was established in the name of a wealthy Liverpool merchant originally from the town.
Ms Moore said in evidence that the residents of the homes found Covid-19 pandemic restrictions “very difficult”, with some resisting the measures, and that was what led to an initial series of complaints against her.
After she was cleared by an initial investigation, some residents began a “campaign” against her. Charles Sheils Charity “bowed to group pressure” and terminated her employment, Ms Moore said.
She said she had been forced to move back to Dublin after nearly a decade living in the tied accommodation with her husband and starting a family there.
Sharon McArdle of Mark Mason Employment Law, appearing for the charity, said that among the fresh complaints against Ms Moore were allegations that CCTV was being used to “monitor [residents’] comings and goings”.
The charity’s position was that Ms Moore had “refused to engage” in the second process.
Its governors had been presented with claims of “bullying, harassment, intimidation, victimisation, malicious and insulting behaviour, coercive control and disclosure of personal information”, it was further submitted.
“The alleged victims were residents in Sheils’ Houses who by virtue of age or other circumstances must be considered as vulnerable. The Governors were obligated to protect them,” Ms McArdle said.
The charity’s governors decided Ms Moore had been “insubordinate” and brought the organisation into disrepute – sacking her without notice for gross misconduct on September 5th, 2021, the tribunal heard.
The complainant’s case was: “Fair procedures were absolutely ignored, and allegations previously dismissed by an external HR independent investigator were used as the factual matrix to dismiss, when they had already been independently found to be unreliable”, according to the adjudicator’s record of legal submissions on behalf of Ms Moore, who was represented in the case by David Smyth.*
WRC adjudicator Brian Dalton wrote in his decision that what had happened at the complex was “akin to a mutiny”.
“The residents or a very significant number decided that they wanted a change and resented [Ms Moore] continuing in office,” he wrote, adding that the context for the resentment was the “restrictive practices and monitoring” needed during Covid-19 lockdown.
He noted that there was “a significant backlash” from the residents of the Killough homes when Ms Moore was “exonerated” by the first investigation, with a “second wave” of complaints resulting in a second disciplinary process.
Mr Dalton noted procedural flaws in that second process and the appeal of its outcome, including a lack of competent representation for Ms Moore, along with the board’s failure to allow her question her accusers or to impartially engage with her on her concerns that some matters were predetermined.
Ms Moore was “entirely blameless”, Mr Dalton added, awarding her €10,000 for unfair dismissal.
*This article was edited on Saturday, January 27th, 2024 to correct the attribution of a quote.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Our In The News podcast is now published daily – Find the latest episode here