
Mary Gavin
Managing Associate | Legal
Ireland

Mary Gavin
Managing Associate
Ireland
No Content Set
Exception:
Website.Models.ViewModels.Components.General.Banners.BannerComponentVm
While robust legal protections exist, recent cases underscore the importance for employers in Ireland to approach maternity and other protected leave with caution to mitigate the risk of discrimination claims.
Ogier's Employment team in Ireland provide a summary of some of the decisions involving complaints of gender discrimination and maternity published by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) in 2025 so far, and explain the potential impact of these decision for employers.
Workplace discrimination continues to be a significant challenge for employees in Ireland in some circumstances, highlighted by the case studies investigated in this piece. The Employment Equality Act 1998-2023 (the Acts) outlaw discriminatory treatment on any of the nine prohibited grounds:
It is vital for Irish employers to recognise the increasing prevalence of discrimination claims in this area and to ensure internal policies, procedures and decision-making processes are compliant.
In its 2024 Annual Report, the WRC stated that it received 1,156 complaints in 2024 under the Acts. This was an increase of 11% compared to 2023. Disability, gender and race continue to be the top three grounds cited within the referrals to the WRC.
The annual increase in complaints before the WRC should serve as a warning to employers to carefully review workplace practices and avoid actions that may be deemed discriminatory, particularly around leave entitlements and return-to-work procedures.
A drinks retail company was ordered to pay a former employee €68,000 for discriminating against her on grounds of gender when she was demoted upon return from maternity leave.
The complainant commenced employment with the company in June 2018 as a premium spirits marketing manager. The complainant took maternity leave in 2023 and was due to return to work in January 2024.
Prior to her scheduled return, the complainant conducted a call with her manager who informed her that her role would be changed to portfolio department lead. No job description was provided to the complainant prior to her return to work. The complainant was concerned that the new role was a demotion and believed that the issue would be discussed when she returned to work.
The complainant returned to work on 22 January. During a team-wide meeting that day, the complainant's manager announced the role change. The complainant made her concerns clear regarding the role change stating that she felt blindsided by the announcement. However, her manager did not take any steps to correct his announcement to her colleagues. Instead, he sought to assure the complainant that the change would be advantageous for her and confirmed he would send her the job description.
The adjudication officer (AO) reviewed the job descriptions for both roles and noted that under the new role, the complainant would no longer report to director level, she would not manage budgets and there was a lower level of experience required for the role. The AO concluded that the new role was a demotion and referred to it as a "fait accompli", meaning that the decision had already been made, leaving the complainant with no option but to accept it.
The AO stated that the complaint was well-founded and awarded her €68,000 compensation, equating to approximately one year's salary. Although anonymisation was not discussed as part of the hearing, in her decision the AO cited Chief Justice of Ireland Donal O'Donnell, stating that such findings "may often be treated as definitive judgements on individuals and will have a considerable half-life and the damage done to reputations can be spread very far and persist for some time". Accordingly, the AO chose to withhold the identities of the parties involved in this case.
This case acts as a reminder to employers of the necessity to ensure role changes on return from leave are fully justified and properly communicated with supporting documentation.
An employee who was dismissed because she was pregnant was awarded more than €136,000 by the Workplace Relations Commission in a case taken against her employer under the Employment Equality Act.
The complainant commenced employment with the respondent as a category sourcing consultant in December 2022 and was an employee until 29 December 2024. She was issued a contract of employment in November 2022 which did not detail an end date. After the complainant revealed her pregnancy in July 2023, the respondent presented her with an addendum to her contract ending her employment in February 2024 when her maternity leave was due to commence.
The complainant initially refused to sign the addendum as it was her position that she was a full-time permanent employee and that there was never any discussion of her role being for a fixed term. The complainant told the WRC that she eventually signed the addendum because the respondent told her that she would not receive any income for January and February 2024 if she did not.
The respondent argued that the original contract's lack of an end date was an error and that the client contract for which the complainant was hired for was also ending. However, the respondent provided no documentation to support this.
The AO was critical of the respondent's lack of written submissions and documentary evidence. The AO was satisfied that the complainant was presented with an addendum bringing her contract to an end 10 days after announcing her pregnancy and stated that this was a unilateral change to the employee's terms and conditions.
The AO ruled that the complainant was dismissed in a discriminatory manner on the grounds of gender, relating to her pregnancy. The respondent was ordered to pay the complainant €124,800 for discrimination and distress, plus €11,400 for loss of earnings.
This case highlights the importance of ensuring that any changes to employment terms or contract endings during pregnancy are fully justified, meticulously documented and approached with legal advice.
A nanny successfully took a claim against her employer when she was dismissed during the Christmas holidays due to her pregnancy.
Ms Hanlon notified her employer, Ms McGrath, of her pregnancy during a performance review meeting in October 2023. Following this, Ms Hanlon felt that Ms McGrath's attitude towards her became cold. Ms McGrath stated in an email that it was her view that Ms Hanlon's employment would be "ending" on 14 March 2024. Ms Hanlon advised Ms McGrath that she had not resigned. However, Ms McGrath alleged that she had done so during their meeting on 2 October 2023.
Ms McGrath cited other reasons which she felt constituted a breach of contract which included Ms Hanlon's involvement in a family business and her intention to seek other work. However, Ms Hanlon stated that this was her only employment. Ms McGrath then stated that Ms Hanlon's employment was at risk if she was not being honest with her.
On 29 December 2023, Ms Hanlon commenced medical leave. Ms McGrath stated in correspondence to Ms Hanlon that she could not trust her to take care of her children and terminated her employment on New Year's Eve.
The AO stated that Ms McGrath failed to show that the dismissal was not connected to Ms Hanlon's pregnancy and awarded her an amount of €55,575.
This case underlines the necessity for employers to handle the dismissal of pregnant employees with particular care, ensuring that any action taken is clearly unrelated to pregnancy and supported by robust evidence to minimise exposure to successful discrimination claims.
Unlike unfair dismissal claims where awards are based on the complainant's loss of earnings and efforts to mitigate their losses, awards amounted by the Workplace Relations Commission in discrimination cases are made for the effects of discrimination which are intended to be dissuasive.
Employers should be aware of the protections afforded to pregnant employees in Ireland. This protection is rooted not only in the Act, but also in the Maternity Protection Acts, EU law and the Irish Constitution. Employers should be wary of taking any steps to terminate a pregnant employee's employment, or to do so while they are on maternity leave as this is a form of protected leave.
Ogier’s Employment team works with employers to assist with navigating complex statutory obligations and reducing the risk of costly workplace disputes. For more information, contact our team via their contact details below.
Ogier is a professional services firm with the knowledge and expertise to handle the most demanding and complex transactions and provide expert, efficient and cost-effective services to all our clients. We regularly win awards for the quality of our client service, our work and our people.
This client briefing has been prepared for clients and professional associates of Ogier. The information and expressions of opinion which it contains are not intended to be a comprehensive study or to provide legal advice and should not be treated as a substitute for specific advice concerning individual situations.
Regulatory information can be found under Legal Notice
Sign up to receive updates and newsletters from us.
Sign up
No Content Set
Exception:
Website.Models.ViewModels.Blocks.SiteBlocks.CookiePolicySiteBlockVm