Soccer

Dundalk FC ordered to pay Brian Gartland over €64k following his dismissal

Former football director took case to Workplace Relations Commission after he was sacked in May 2024

Brian Gartland has been awarded over €64,000 by the Workplace Relations Commission in relation to his sacking by Dundalk FC. Photograph: Tom Maher/Inpho
Brian Gartland has been awarded over €64,000 by the Workplace Relations Commission in relation to his sacking by Dundalk FC. Photograph: Tom Maher/Inpho
Stephen Bourke
Wed Jan 29 2025 - 16:20

Dundalk FC sacked its former football director Brian Gartland in an act of whistleblower penalisation after he voiced health and safety concerns about squad members playing “three days a week straight” upon coming back from injury, a tribunal has found.

Gartland, a former Dundalk player, has been awarded over €64,000 for multiple breaches of employment law by the club after filing complaints to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) in the wake of his high-profile sacking in May 2024.

The adjudicator, Conor Stokes, proceeded with a hearing last November without any presence from Dundalk FC management. He noted correspondence from the club’s new owner stating that “he had just taken over the club” and was unaware of the proceedings. Stokes wrote that the club had been on notice of the claims since July 2024 and decided it was properly on notice of the case.

Gartland told the WRC that he made protected disclosures expressing health and safety concerns on April 19th and 22nd last year, shortly after a new manager had been appointed.

READ MORE

In the fortnight prior to the new manager’s appointment, he had been acting as co-manager of the team on a temporary basis, the tribunal heard.

He told the tribunal he “raised an issue” with the then-owner of the club about a “health condition that the new manager had which may impact on the team” – telling his employer he was unsure about the accuracy of the information and suggesting the owner follow up on the matter.

Neither the former owner of the club nor the manager in question were named in the decision published by the WRC.

He said the intention of the club had been that the co-managers would be in a position to step away from team management duties when the new manager was appointed, but that they “couldn’t”, as the new manager had asked them to cover training schedules.

Gartland said he began to express concerns about injury prevention on the basis that “players can’t play three days a week straight after coming back from injury”.

He said team selection had been left to him and the other former co-manager, but that they were “overruled” on changes during games – leading to players “being out for weeks and months”.

“It was becoming a real risk to the players’ health,” the tribunal recorded in a note of Gartland’s evidence.

He said that in a phone call with the then-owner of the club on May 10th, 2024, the owner told him: “If the CEO wants to replace the manager, then that’s his call.”

Gartland told the adjudicator that the manager at one point “wanted to put a player in a position he hadn’t played before”. He said the manager “simply couldn’t remember what position the player usually played”.

The complainant said he was approached by potential sponsors offering funding for an “alternative manager” and was asked by the club’s CEO to “open discussions”. He said he then got a call from the owner on May 11th, 2024 asking who gave him permission to negotiate and suggesting that he was “undermining” the manager.

He said the owner “fired” him on that call. His response was to ask for confirmation in writing, he said. A press statement confirming his departure was issued by the club “very shortly afterwards” and he received an email “indicating that he was fired” the following day, Gartland said.

The owner phoned him a few days later apologising and asking him to come back, the complainant told the WRC.

Gartland declined because he didn’t think there could be a workable solution as the press had been notified, the news was “very public” and it was “all over his home town”.

Solicitor Ger Connolly of Mason Hayes and Curran, acting for Gartland, submitted that the four-line statement released to the media by Dundalk FC “created a lot of distress”.

“The statement clearly indicates that the decision to terminate his employment was not his own,” Connolly said in a legal submission. He said the statement was “damning in terms of its brevity”, as it implied his client was dismissed from his first professional role in football off the field of play on performance grounds.

Connolly said there was a belief that Gartland “turned his back and abandoned the club” which was damning to his reputation in League of Ireland circles.

“It is also damning to his reputation in the town of Dundalk where he lives with his young family,” the solicitor said. The complainant also referred to being “abused by fans in Dundalk as a direct result of the statement of [the club] and the manner in which he was dismissed” in his complaint.

Gartland himself told the WRC: “Mentally, this saga has been very hard to take.”

He explained that because he lives in the centre of Dundalk Town, all his neighbours are fans and he “cannot go anywhere” without facing questions on the “disintegration” of his career.

Connolly argued it would be “deeply wrong” for the WRC to limit an award of compensation to Gartland’s financial losses and argued the WRC should set compensation at the maximum level available – five years’ salary, or €250,000.

In his decision, the adjudicator said there was no evidence of Dundalk FC giving Gartland a reason for his dismissal or invoking any formal processes.

“The only logical conclusion is that [he] was dismissed for having made a protected disclosure,” Stokes wrote. He found the club in breach of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977, as amended by the legislation on protected disclosures.

As Gartland had found new work after a “short time”, Stokes considered it “just and equitable” to award the complainant “compensation of 100 per cent of his loss” from the dismissal, a sum of €52,629.62.

Noting that there was only an “unsigned copy of a draft contract” of employment available to the complainant, Stokes made a finding that the club was in breach of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994. He directed the payment of four weeks’ salary, €3,727.36, in compensation to Gartland for the breach.

The adjudicator also found Dundalk FC in breach of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 in respect of its failure to award the complainant a pay rise. This was on foot of the complainant’s “credible” evidence on a “verbal agreement” and the draft contract of employment.

The total awarded to Gartland was €64,433.90.