Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

An Ice Cream Worker

An Ice Cream Producer

Representatives

Self-Represented

HR manager

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

IR - SC - 00005738

25/11/2025

Worker’s Position The Worker alleges that during a brief period of employment they were subjected to humiliating and intimidating treatment, breaches of working time rights, and inappropriate use of their personal contact details for work communications. The Worker says that these matters caused distress and a sense of vulnerability at work and sought an apology, confirmation that similar issues would not arise for others, and redress for a period of eight weeks without pay.

Employer’s Position The Employer denies the allegations and submits that it acted reasonably and in good faith. It contends that a prompt and fair investigation found no bullying or statutory breaches, that any procedural shortcomings were addressed through corrective measures, and that no data protection breach occurred.

The Employer insists that the complaint is not well founded and should be dismissed

The Worker began employment in October 2025 with the Employer.

Verbal Humiliation

In November 2025, following approximately five and a half hours of work, including cleaning duties during a busy Saturday trading period, the Worker was informed—via another staff member—that management had said the Worker “smelled.” This communication was indirect, unnecessary, and humiliating. The Worker found the manner in which this issue was addressed to be unprofessional and degrading.

Physical Contact and Intimidation

Later in  November 2025, while the Worker was trying to leave the workplace, a manager allegedly cornered the Worker in a staff corridor within Blanchardstown Shopping Centre and physically grabbed the Worker’s arm in order to prevent them from leaving, despite being asked to stop. The Worker reports feeling unsafe and intimidated as a result of this incident. As the incident occurred in a shared staff corridor, the Worker believes that CCTV footage may exist.

Forced Overtime and Denial of Breaks

The Worker reports repeated breaches of working time rights in October 2025 and  November 2025. These incidents are said to demonstrate a disregard for the Worker’s statutory rights under Irish working time legislation.

Data Protection / GDPR Concerns

At the commencement of employment, the Worker provided a single personal contact number for work‑related purposes. The Worker was later added to a WhatsApp staff group without consent and was expected to engage with work‑related communications outside normal working hours. The Worker further reports receiving direct messages from multiple staff members on their personal phone during non‑working hours. The Worker contends that this use of personal contact details constitutes inappropriate processing of personal data and a potential breach of data protection and GDPR obligations.

Internal Complaint and Referral to the WRC

The Worker has submitted a formal complaint to the employer’s HR department outlining these issues. However, due to the seriousness of the matters raised the Worker has also referred the dispute to the Commission.

Overall Impact and Request

The Worker says that the cumulative effect of these incidents resulted in humiliation, distress, and a sense of vulnerability in the workplace. The Worker contends that their dignity, personal safety, privacy, and statutory employment rights were undermined and requests that the Workplace Relations Commission review the matter and provide guidance in relation to the alleged harassment, working time breaches, and data protection concerns.

At the hearing, the Worker indicated that their primary concern was to ensure that similar issues would not arise for others. The Worker sought an apology and confirmed that they were without pay for a period of eight weeks.

The Employer provided a comprehensive response to allegations of workplace bullying, breaches of employment rights, and data protection concerns. All allegations are denied. The Employer claims that it acted reasonably and in good faith throughout and that any identified shortcomings were addressed promptly and appropriately.

Employer’s Position

The Employer submits that a prompt, independent, and fair investigation was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The investigation applied the balance of probabilities and afforded all parties an opportunity to be heard. While certain procedural and communication deficiencies were identified, no evidence of bullying or deliberate mistreatment was found. Corrective actions, including training, disciplinary measures, policy reinforcement, and rectification of administrative errors, were implemented where necessary.

Investigation Process

The investigation involved a review of the formal complaint, interviews with the complainant and relevant staff, and an examination of payroll, rostering, and communication records. Efforts were made to obtain CCTV footage; however, access was refused by the shopping centre, which needed a request from An Garda Síochána. Accordingly, CCTV evidence was unavailable.

Allegations of Bullying and Intimidation

A discussion about uniform and hygiene standards was found to have occurred via another staff member for operational purposes. While the Employer accepts that this was not managed in line with best practice, it did not amount to bullying. Allegations of physical restraint by management could not be substantiated due to the absence of corroborating evidence.

Working Time and Pay

The investigation confirmed that the complainant was correctly paid for hours worked on 28 October 2025. A minor underpayment identified on 3 November 2025 was corrected. No systemic breach of working time or break obligations was established, and monitoring measures were reinforced.

Data Protection and Use of WhatsApp

The Employer outlined that WhatsApp was used for operational communications on the basis of legitimate business interests, and no objection was raised at the time. Inappropriate usage was identified and addressed through managerial retraining, disciplinary action where appropriate, and the issuance of guidance restricting use to essential communications. No data protection breach of the nature alleged was proven.

Additional Workplace Matters

Issues relating to the general workplace conduct were examined. These matters resulted in warnings, training, and procedural guidance. No conduct targeted at the complainant was identified.

Legal Context

The Employer submits that workplace bullying requires a pattern of repeated inappropriate behaviour undermining dignity at work. The matters established amount to communication and procedural shortcomings and isolated instances of poor judgment, which do not meet the legal threshold for bullying.

Conclusion

The Employer submits that the evidence does not support a finding of workplace bullying and that it acted promptly, reasonably, and in good faith. All identified issues were addressed appropriately. Accordingly, the Employer requests that the complaint be dismissed and that a finding issue in its favour.

In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.

Section 13 of the Industrial relations Act

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 provides for the referral of a trade dispute to the Commission for investigation and recommendation. The role of the Adjudication Officer is to consider the submissions and evidence of the parties, to inquire into the dispute, and to issue a recommendation setting out what, in the Officer’s view, would constitute a fair and reasonable resolution of the matter.

The process is entirely voluntary and non‑binding, and participation does not affect the legal rights of either party. A recommendation issued under section 13 does not determine liability or impose enforceable obligations but is intended to assist the parties in resolving the dispute by reference to industrial relations principles and good practice.

Current Dispute

I have heard the matters in the current dispute and understand entirely the upset and hurt felt by the Worker. I am also struck at the efficiency of the Employer HR Department in dealing with the matter where it was under their control to do so.

I have no doubt that the cumulative effect of these incidents resulted in humiliation, distress, and a sense of vulnerability  for the Worke, subjectively. I am also struck on the conformity to  good procedures on the part of the Employer and the interventions to prevent a repeat of this  for anyone else, in this the Worker has achieved one of their aims for the hearing.

 I am also struck that the Employer has opted to attend to the hearing, given that there was no compunction for them to do so and they could have availed of their stature right to object to it being held.

Other Directions

I am not called upon under section 13 to provide further direction to the parties in regard to their processes as I note that they have processes in place and have been able to use them. The reference to the alleged harassment, working time breaches, and data protection concerns are not encompassed by section 13 in terms of legal rights and would require complaints under their own headings.

The Worker contends that their dignity, personal safety, privacy, and statutory employment rights were undermined and requests that the Workplace Relations Commission review the matter and provide guidance in relation to the alleged harassment, working time breaches, and data protection concerns. I also believe that there is genuine remorse on the part of the Employer and this was expressed at the hearing.

Recommendation

On the matter of lost wages, the Worker would have no recourse to the Unfair Dismissal Act, constructive or otherwise,  given their short service and constructive dismissal would require a consideration of the use of the grievance procedure, if it were.

With that in mind, in terms of the short service and the fact that the Worker has admirably mitigated their losses I am mindful to recommend that the Employer make an ex gratia payment of €400 to the Worker on the understanding that the Worker accepts this is in full and final settlement of all issues arising from the workplace up until the date of the hearing.

It is my recommendation  to the Worker, if this acceptable, that they consider it as a full and final settlement , they make this  known to the Employer        

trade dispute, non‑binding recommendation, voluntary process, ex gratia payment, short service, , humiliation and distress, remorse of employer