The former director of the Pavilion Theatre, Dún Laoghaire claimed yesterday she was constructively dismissed after being treated in an "aggressive, rude and very unpleasant manner" by the theatre chairman.
Ms Karen Hebden moved from Britain to become director of the new Dublin theatre in May 2000. As the theatre experienced ongoing financial difficulties, her relationship with the theatre chairman, Mr Tony Barry grew increasingly difficult. She wrote her resignation letter in November 2001 after claiming she had been stripped of her job description.
Ms Hebden's case for constructive dismissal opened at the Employment Appeals Tribunal yesterday. The theatre's counsel, Mr Roddy Horan said it rejected the claim. He said Ms Hebden had simply resigned. Her departure had been "civilised" and in fact she had returned to oversee some work afterwards. Such action would be unheard of in a constructive dismissal situation, he said.
The saddest aspect of the case was the "personal vilification" of Mr Barry, Mr Horan said. He claimed Mr Barry had been "demonised" as part of "a tactic" and "a ruse" to bring a case against the theatre.
Ms Hebden told the tribunal she was initially attracted to the job because it was in an "amazing" location and she was excited by its business plan.
She said the theatre experienced "an incredibly difficult" start-up. The building appeared to be finished, but an enormous amount of work had still to be done. She discovered a capital debt of £100,000 which was "a noose around the theatre's neck".
The theatre was due to open in September 2000 but was not ready. It was briefly opened for a function for a Japanese princess in October, 2000 and then closed until it opened for a Christmas show that December.
The official launch was "botched", Ms Hebden claimed, and the theatre was like a building site hours before the opening. Because of the delay in opening, box office receipts were not as high as expected, yet staff had been employed for six months in the run up to the launch.
She wrote three letters to board members warning about the "huge deficit" facing the theatre in 2000 and 2001 and said she could not manage the theatre with such a deficit. Ms Hebden feared she would be scapegoated for the deficit and claimed this had later happened.
She said she did not want to offend the theatre board, but working with them was like working with "a group of amateurs" who did not understand the difference between producing a show and buying in a production. They wanted the equivalent of a Rolls Royce, yet they could only afford a push-bike, she said. Her requests for fund-raising initiatives were rejected, she said.
Counsel for the theatre said Ms Hebden was a highly talented individual and had extraordinary artistic talent. She had produced a series of very exciting, lavish, extravaganzas. "In fact, they were financially unviable," Mr Horan said. The theatre had lost £784,398 in 2001 and was "virtually bankrupt" at that stage.
Ms Hebden "did not heed the financial strictures and limitations which were an obvious aspect of her function," Mr Horan said. He pointed to four in-house productions which had lost almost £400,000 in total.
He also questioned the role of Ms Hebden's partner, Mr Stephen Edwards who had acted as a consultant to the theatre. Mr Horan said he was "an intrusive and indeed unwelcome presence" and had issued "an outrageous ultimatum" seeking Mr Barry's immediate resignation.
Ms Hebden said she was "amazed at the vitriol" directed by Mr Barry at Mr Edwards. Mr Barry had claimed he was "a scrounger" yet he had done immense work for the theatre for little reward.
The tribunal will resume hearing the case in April.
