Case Number: DEC-E2016-039. Workplace Relations Commission

CourtWorkplace Relations Commission
Date07 March 2016
Docket NumberDEC-E2016-039
PartiesMs Rashmi Sharma AND Wink Eye Salon
EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY ACTS DECISION NO. DEC-E2016-039 PARTIES Ms Rashmi Sharma AND Wink Eye Salon File reference: EE/2014/316 Date of issue: 7th March 2016

HEADNOTES: Employment Equality Acts Sections 6, 8(1) (a) – Family Status and Race – Discrimination on Conditions of Employment, and Section 14(A) Harassment.

1. DISPUTE

1.1 This dispute concerns a claim by Ms Rashmi Sharma (Claimant) that she was discriminated on grounds of family status and race contrary to Section 6 of the Employment Equality Acts; regarding her conditions of employment in terms of section 8 of those Acts; and that she was harassed contrary to section 14A of the Employment Equality Acts. The Claimant alleged the last acts of discrimination and harassment that she experienced were on 4th June 2014.

1.2 The complainant referred a claim to the Director of the Equality Tribunal on 7th June 2014 under the Employment Equality Acts. On 7th November 2015 in accordance with his powers under section 75 of the Employment Equality Acts, the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission delegated the case to me, Gerry Rooney, an Adjudication Officer/Equality Officer for investigation, hearing and decision and for the exercise of other relevant functions of the Director under Part VII of the Acts, on which date my investigation commenced. Submissions were received from both sides. In accordance with Section 79(1) of the Employment Equality Acts and as part of my investigation I proceeded to a hearing on 18th January 2016.

1.3 This decision is issued by me following the establishment of the Workplace Relations Commission on 1 October 2015, as an Adjudication Officer who was an Equality Officer prior to 1 October 2015, in accordance with section 83 (3) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015

2. CLAIMANTS' SUBMISSION

2.1. The Claimant has a young family of two children and commenced full time permanent employment with the Respondent in November 2013. She is an Indian national and was appointed as a Threader and Sales Assistant at the Respondent’s concession outlet in Clery’s store, Dublin.

2.2. Shortly after commencing employment the Claimant contended that she was required to attend work at short notice. However on a number of occasions, due to her family circumstances, she experienced difficulty in getting to work on time and this resulted in her manager harassing her. The Claimant alleged this happened on a number of occasions shortly after her appointment, and consequently she sought to have reduced working hours.

2.3. The Claimant advised that she was granted shorter working hours but the hours offered to her were only 18 hours per week which was less than she was available to work for and she alleged she was discriminated on the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT