Independent TD Violet-Anne Wynne has been ordered to pay for a former employee €11,500, after an adjudicator at the Workplace Relations Commission described the politician’s decision to dismiss the woman last year as “quite astonishing”.
Fiona Smyth worked for Ms Wynne at her Clare constituency office between August 2021 and March 2023 when she was dismissed with one week’s pay in lieu of notice. She claimed the circumstances of the dismissal had contravened section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977.
In evidence, Ms Smyth said her work included answering the phone, dealing with emails and other general administrative work. She said she felt her relationship with Ms Wynne was generally good and a performance review in November 2022 related to a reorganisation of the constituency office operation had not given rise to any issues.
She was not, she suggested, aware of any concerns on the part of Ms Wynne that might in any way pose a threat to her continued employment.
‘A malignancy in society’: Tears and smirks in a Sheffield court as rioters jailed over wrecked asylum hotel
Boy (16) arrested over chaplain stabbing shouted complaints about Irish involvement in Mali
Restaurant closures: ‘If it’s going to hit Dylan McGrath, it’s going to affect many businesses. The model is broken’
After years living in Ireland, everything in Australia feels suspiciously easy
She said Ms Wynne had been supportive of her as she and her husband underwent IVF treatment but that at one point, when she sought to take certified sick leave, Ms Wynne had sought a letter from a consultant outlining her treatment plan. Ms Smyth said she felt this was an invasion of her privacy and suggested it was a matter for the HR department of the Oireachtas.
It had also become an issue, she told the hearing, that her husband was a member of Sinn Féin, the party Ms Wynne had been a member of when she was elected to the Dáil.
The sequence of events that led to her dismissal was triggered, however, by a request for time off at short notice because her brother, who had long-standing medical needs, had been taken ill.
In her decision, adjudicating officer Louise Boyle said it was `quite astonishing to terminate the complainant’s employment, through a message to the complainant’s union official, in the manner in which Ms Wynne did’
Ms Wynne, the hearing was told, did ultimately agree to Ms Smyth taking the leave but said she wanted to conduct another performance review. Ms Smyth sought union representation from Siptu and the union official wrote to Ms Wynne seeking a postponement of the review as well as detail of various workplace policies and asking whether they were complied with.
During the exchange, Ms Wynne wrote that: “Your correspondence on the matter is aggressive and not appreciated . . . I wish to now terminate Mrs Fiona Smyths (sic) contract with one week paid in lieu. If you could kindly request that Mrs Fiona Smyth drops the key to the office back into the office letterbox. That would be much appreciated.”
During the hearing, Ms Wynne said there had been issues with Ms Smyth’s work over a prolonged period and though there were no written warnings, some of these problems were acknowledged by Ms Smyth when the pair discussed them.
She said Ms Smyth also failed to comply with requests with regard to communication and had at one point claimed overtime for a week she was out sick with Covid. Ms Smyth said all overtime payments had been signed off on.
Following the dismissal, Peter Glynn copied the Oireachtas HR department into correspondence and though it said it was not a party to the dispute, suggested mediation which Ms Smyth was in favour of but Ms Wynne refused.
In her decision, adjudicating officer Louise Boyle said Ms Wynne had pointed to what she regarded as a succession of breaches of trust but said it was “quite astonishing to terminate the complainant’s employment, through a message to the complainant’s union official, in the manner in which she did without following any procedures and with no clear reason given”.
Ms Boyle added: “The respondent failed to engage in any procedures prior to dismissal, failed to provide the complainant with a reason for the dismissal, failed to provide an appeals process and would not engage in mediation.”
She said the dismissal had been unfair and awarded Ms Smyth, who subsequently found less well-paid work, 15 weeks’ salary amounting to €11,500.
Ms Smyth was represented by Áine Feeney of Siptu’s Workers Rights Centre. Ms Wynne represented herself having initially sought an adjournment, Ms Boyle recorded, because her legal representative had sought payment “up front” and she could not afford it.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Join The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Listen to our Inside Politics podcast for the best political chat and analysis
