A manager found by her employer to have produced a “fraudulent” training record after sending a cleaner home for turning up to work with blue dye in her hair has secured €10,000 in compensation following her sacking.
Michelle Murray lost her job as a client services manager with Cagney Maintenance Service Ltd, trading as Cagney Contract Cleaning, last August, following the findings of a company investigation into her conduct, which were found to be “reasonable” by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC).
However, the tribunal concluded that although dismissal was a “reasonable” sanction, the company had erred by failing to allow her cross-examine her accusers, rendering her dismissal unfair.
The tribunal heard that suspicions were raised when a human resources (HR) manager noticed “a swipe of Tipp-Ex” on a document recording that the worker sent home had received induction training covering rules on “extreme hair colours”.
READ MORE
The tribunal heard that since 2012, Ms Murray had been in charge of a “flagship contract” at a prominent site in Dublin City, run as a joint venture in the events industry between the Office of Public Works (OPW) and a private enterprise.
The tribunal heard that in mid-March 2023, a team leader working under Ms Murray, Sylvia Sanchez, arrived to work at the site with some blue dye in her hair.
Ms Murray said she was contacted by staff of the client site telling her this was not allowed, and that she told Ms Sanchez this was “against the dress code” and that she “would have to change it”.
Ms Sanchez “was upset and left the site” she added.
“Your hair is lovely, but I can’t allow this on [the site],” Ms Murray wrote in a text message of 11th March, 2023, to the worker, which was opened to the hearing. Ms Sanchez quit a few days later, the tribunal heard.
Around this time, in the spring of 2023, Ms Murray had a number of absences due to family reasons, force majeure and illness, the tribunal was told – spending six weeks out of work before returning on 4th May, 2023.
Ms Murray said she was “ambushed and blindsided” when the firm’s managing director called her to a meeting on her first day back and told her she was the subject of multiple allegations before suspending her.
Ms Murray said in her evidence that she was “confident” Ms Sanchez was aware of the company’s policy on hair colouring as she had “undergone induction training on two separate occasions”.
Ms Sanchez, who was called as a witness by the company, said she was not aware of the ban on hair dye and told the WRC she had other colleagues with dyed hair – including one with “purple and green” in her hair.
Gareth Kyne of Management Support Services, who appeared for the respondent, questioned Ms Sanchez on a document stating that she had been at an induction course covering hair dye policy.
The worker told the tribunal she did not have the induction training and that her signature was “forged” on the document.
She told the hearing she had observed Ms Murray “yelling” at her co-workers and said that some workers had “left the job because of the treatment they received” from Ms Murray.
She added that the company would not let her back to work unless she changed her hair colour.
A former HR officer with the firm, Nicole O’Carroll, carried out an investigation into complaints against Ms Murray.
She told the tribunal she noticed “a swipe of Tipp Ex” on one of the attendance sheets and wondered whether the document had been “doctored”.
Ms O’Carroll said her investigation findings included “clear fraudulent information provided in a grievance to mislead an investigation” – confirming that the “fraudulent information” she referred to in her report was Ms Sanchez’s training record.
Among other allegations were reports of Ms Murray “shouting at colleagues” and using “vulgar and expletive language”, she noted.
Ms Murray’s position in evidence was that she “did not falsify any document”, “did not use Tipp-Ex on any document” and had “no knowledge of how it got on to the document”.
“I’m not changing my story. It is how it is, and it did not happen,” she said – telling the WRC the behaviours she was accused of “did not take place”.
Ms Murray told the tribunal she had given Cagney “100 per cent at all times over the 17 years” only to have her livelihood and her “good work and name” taken away. She said the WRC hearings were “the only opportunity she got to speak”.
Adjudicator John Harraghy expressed “reservations” about the investigation, but concluded it came to “reasonable conclusions” and the decision to dismiss Ms Murray was also “reasonable”.
However, the dismissal was rendered unfair because Ms Murray was denied the right to cross-examine her accusers during a disciplinary meeting, he concluded.
Mr Harraghy ruled the unfair dismissal complaint “well-founded”, concluding: “I am not convinced that the respondent’s disciplinary procedure was fair and in compliance with the principles of natural justice.”
Ms Murray had sought “the maximum award” of compensation of over €118,000 – but Mr Harraghy noted her evidence that she had opted to work just one day a week following her dismissal “to avoid exceeding the earnings threshold to qualify for Carer’s Benefit”
He decided €5,580 was “just and equitable” compensation in the case.
He awarded Ms Murray a further €4,500 for a breach of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994 on foot of a finding that the company had failed to furnish Ms Murray with a full statement of her terms of conditions of employment when she was hired in April 2006.
Further employment rights complaints by Ms Murray were either withdrawn or dismissed by the tribunal.
Robert Donnelly, BL appeared for Ms Murray in the case, instructed by solicitor James Kavanagh of Padraig Hyland & Co. The company was represented by HR consultancy Management Support Services (Ireland) Ltd.
