A voice note recorded by a worker talking about “cocaine use, smoking joints” and having “h*es” on a subcontractor’s site at Intel’s Irish semiconductor plant has been produced as a “cover-up” for whistleblower penalisation, a lawyer has said at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC).
A safety manager for the company, Weltec Engineering Ltd, said the “attitude” the worker displayed in the voice notes meant he was not prepared to have him on site – but accepted he didn’t take everything the worker said literally.
“Saying ‘We have h*es up here’; unless they’re badged or inducted by Intel, he might have a difficult time getting them in,” the manager said.
Aran Burrows, a former general operative with the firm, has alleged in a complaint under the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 that the non-renewal of his contract of employment in February 2024 was an act of whistleblower penalisation.
The tribunal heard the voice note referring to “cocaine use, smoking joints at work, b**ches and h*es at work, and using equipment at height” was apparently recorded by the complainant and sent to a former health and safety officer, Mr F, while he had a company phone.
Company witnesses they had not read or did not know about a report Mr Burrows said he sent to his line manager on 19 February last year for escalation at the time they decided not to renew his contract towards the end of that month.
Mr Burrows’ solicitor, Jade Wright of Ormonde Solicitors, told the tribunal on Tuesday that the report contained “some satire”, but met the legal test for a protected disclosure, raising a series of concerns about a project installing brackets at the Co Kildare plant.
In it, Mr Burrows referred to a lack of management supervision, concerns about health and safety – including harnesses and safety lanyards “being left out unsafely” – and a “practice of claiming credit for work that was not complete”.
“Nobody read the document,” the company’s human resources manager David O’Connor told the tribunal, adding that it was not at any stage identified as a protected disclosure and that he was not aware of the document at all until after Mr Burrows was gone from the company.
Site manager Dave Kerrigan denied asking Mr Burrows to put together the report. He said he forwarded it unopened to a superior as Mr Burrows had asked.
Mr Kerrigan’s evidence was that it was a “joint decision” between himself, Mr O’Connor and the company’s health and safety manager James Hackett on Friday, 23rd February last year not to renew Mr Burrows’ contract upon its expiry around a week and a half later following the discovery of the voice notes that morning.
Ms Wright asked Mr Kerrigan how he could take any aspect of the voice note as factual in view of the references to “using cocaine at work, smoking at work, saying he would have ‘b**ches and hoes’ at work”.
“Did you not think that was satire and messing?” she said.
“You’re telling me they’re satire. I’m not telling you they’re satire,” Mr Kerrigan replied.
The company health and safety manager, Mr Hackett, said it was apparent from the message that Mr Burrows was working at height while “not clipped off” and “clearly using a phone” – breaches of an Intel health and safety policy. The tribunal was told that serious safety breaches could lead to the staff of subcontractors being blacklisted from Intel sites.
When Ms Wright put it to him that there had not been even an “informal chat” with her client before the decision not to renew his contract, Mr Hackett said he took it that Mr Burrows was “being honest” in the voice note.
“That’s not necessarily true, because in your direct evidence you said you didn’t take everything Mr Burrows took literally,” she said.
“Saying that ‘we have h*es up here’ – unless they’re badged or inducted by Intel, he might have a difficult time getting them in here,” Mr Hackett said.
Ms Wright asked how he knew Mr Burrows was not “clipped off” to the work at height system when he recorded the voice note.
“I didn’t, but that just shows the attitude of the individual,” Mr Hackett said.
Ms Wright put it to him that the WhatsApp messages had been produced by the firm as part of a “cover-up” for penalisation in the form of non-renewal of contract and that the company “no longer wanted Mr Burrows to be an employee”.
“I am telling the truth. It was based on the recordings. At that time neither myself nor David O’Connor were aware of this report even having been completed or issued. It wasn’t a topic of discussion at this meeting, we weren’t aware of its existence, and it’s only after the fact that I became aware of [it],” Mr Hackett said.
Adjudicator Shay Henry heard the evidence and cross-examination of Mr Burrows on a previous date last year. He closed the hearing after hearing closing submissions from the parties and is expected to issue a decision in writing in due course.
- Sign up for the Business Today newsletter and get the latest business news and commentary in your inbox every weekday morning
- Opt in to Business 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
- Our Inside Business podcast is published weekly – Find the latest episode here
