Case 1. 161 named female employees v Trinity College, Dublin
The employees' union, SIPTU, claimed the women were entitled to the same pay and pension entitlements as three male colleagues. The women were employed as catering assistants, cleaners and secretarial staff, the men as housemen and grounds men. The college said the men and women did not perform "like work" and grounds other than gender accounted for the differences.
The Equality Officer rejected the college's arguments that the women were part-time workers and therefore should have no pension rights. The officer recommended the catering assistants be paid the same as the men, that payments be backdated three years and that all claimants get pension rights.
Case 2. A named woman v a named national school
The employee's union, INTO, said the woman, the school's vice-principal, had been discriminated against on grounds of gender when she was not appointed principal following interview. A man was appointed. The school said the interview process had been fair.
The Equality Officer found that the selection panel was not influenced by gender and that the woman had not been discriminated against.
Case 3. A named woman v Clonmel Healthcare Ltd.
The woman applied for a specialist medical position and seven candidates were interviewed, all women. She was asked about her marital and family status. The company said the questions did not form part of the interview and that the successful candidate was of the same age and marital status.
The Equality Officer found the company did not adequately refute the allegation and that the woman had been discriminated against. It recommended that the company pay the woman £1,000 compensation.