Irish Firm Fined €50k for Denying New Mother Part-Time Work

Firm Ordered to Pay €50,000 in Landmark Discrimination Case

An Irish firm has been ordered by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) to pay €50,000 in compensation to a former employee after it unlawfully discriminated against her on grounds of gender and family status. The ruling, which represents nearly two years of the employee’s gross remuneration, followed the company’s refusal to consider her request for part-time work upon her return from maternity leave.

The case serves as a stark reminder to employers of their legal obligations to new parents and the severe financial penalties for failing to engage meaningfully with requests for flexible working arrangements. The Adjudicator’s decision highlighted a complete failure by the employer to justify its actions, ultimately leading to a finding of discriminatory constructive dismissal.

The Complainant, an accounts administrator who had been with the company for over two years, was scheduled to return from maternity leave in September 2024. Ahead of her return, she proactively arranged a meeting with her manager to discuss the possibility of transitioning to a part-time schedule to accommodate her new family responsibilities.

A Dismissive and Unlawful Response

During the WRC hearing, the employee gave evidence that the meeting was far from constructive. She recounted that her manager’s immediate reaction was dismissive, allegedly stating, “she knew she [the Complainant] was going to request this,” and remarking that “everyone has kids.”

The employee was further informed that part-time work was not an option unless she had medical issues and that the arrangement “did not work” for the company. The manager categorically stated that a part-time role would not be accommodated in any department. The lack of any genuine dialogue or exploration of alternatives left the employee with no viable path forward.

Just five days after this disheartening meeting, the Complainant emailed her manager, explaining that without the option of part-time work, she would be unable to return to her position. In a move that the Adjudicator later scrutinised, the company accepted her resignation in a reply sent a mere 40 minutes later, demonstrating no attempt to retain a valued employee or explore a compromise.

Inconsistent Policies and Damaging Revelations

In its defence, the company claimed the part-time request was considered but ultimately declined on operational grounds. However, its position unravelled during cross-examination. The firm initially denied employing any part-time workers, a statement intended to support its argument that such arrangements were unworkable. This claim was later proven to be false when it was revealed that relatives of the company’s CEO were, in fact, employed on a part-time basis.

The Adjudicator noted with concern that this opportunity was never even considered for the Complainant, suggesting a clear case of unequal treatment. The ruling also condemned the employer’s broader lack of knowledge regarding employment law, citing its failure to pay the employee for time off taken to attend ante-natal appointments—a basic statutory protection for pregnant employees—and the absence of any effort to rectify the oversight.

A Dissuasive Award

The Adjudicator found unequivocally that the employee had been discriminated against. The decision underscored the employer’s complete lack of meaningful engagement and its inability to provide a coherent business justification for why a part-time employee would not be of assistance, particularly as the full-time role remained vacant after her departure.

Given the circumstances, reinstatement was not considered appropriate. Instead, the Adjudicator focused on compensation, highlighting the need for the award to have a “dissuasive effect” on the employer. The €50,000 penalty, calculated on the Complainant’s annual salary of €26,000 including bonuses, falls just short of the statutory maximum of two years’ pay, reflecting the severity of the company’s transgressions.

This case sends a powerful message across the Irish business landscape. Employers are legally and ethically bound to give full and fair consideration to all requests for flexible working arrangements, especially from those returning from maternity leave. A simple refusal based on unsubstantiated “operational grounds” will not withstand legal scrutiny. Businesses must be prepared to engage in genuine dialogue, document their decision-making process, and ensure that all employees are treated equitably, regardless of their family status.