Two stable hands fired by a stud farm after they got into a row with a manager over a plan to euthanise two horses have won four months’ wages each for unfair dismissal.
Forenaghts Stud Farm Ltd in Naas, Co Kildare, has been ordered by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) to pay more than €18,000 to Rebecca Conlon and her daughter Rachel O’Reilly, who were both dismissed in June 2023.
The employment tribunal heard that a “verbal altercation” broke out on May 24th, 2023, between Ms Conlon, Ms O’Reilly and the stud farm’s yard and racing manager, Caoimhe Doherty.
Ms Conlon and her daughter had joined the stud in September 2019 and spent more than 3½ years working at the farm, caring directly for the horses. Ms Conlon was a full-time worker and Ms O’Reilly was part-time, the tribunal heard.
Mexican beauty influencer Valeria Márquez shot dead while livestreaming on TikTok
PGA Championship Round 1 live updates: Rory McIlroy and Shane Lowry among early starters
Galway’s persistently high rents to be investigated by RTB following ‘concerning’ trends in new data
Look inside: Former RTÉ presenter’s Glenageary home with French countryside-style garden for €2.25m
The farm’s position was that mother and daughter had been dismissed because they had both “challenged and abused Ms Doherty verbally in front of a vet and other members of staff” after they “did not agree with the decision taken to euthanise two mares”.
Ms Doherty, who gave evidence to the WRC, had decided to have the horses put down after consulting with the vet and “other extremely experienced professionals”, the tribunal was told.
The two complainants “reacted badly to the decision to euthanise the mares” and displayed behaviour that was “simply unacceptable”, the employer submitted.
“The decision was met with loud and angry responses, the use of swear words, disrespectful comments and allegations of gross incompetence directed at Ms Doherty,” the company submitted in response to both workers’ cases.
Ms Doherty was “bullied and intimidated” by the workers’ behaviour and was left “embarrassed” and “humiliated”, with a sense that there was “no respect for her”, the company further submitted.
Ms Conlon told the tribunal she was taken “completely by surprise” by the decision to put down the mares and was upset about it, and argued that the horses “should not be put down”.
Her daughter told the tribunal she was “physically upset” about it.
Ms Conlon said tensions were raised and “inappropriate language” was used, and those involved in the row “walked away from each other still disputing the decision to put down the horses”.
She said she went to Ms Doherty the following morning “to try and resolve the dispute” but received a letter later in the morning calling her to a human resources meeting.
Both workers were suspended on May 29th, and met with an external investigator on June 15th.
Ms Conlon argued that a statement taken from the vet who witnessed the altercation had described her as “upset but remaining calm during the incident”.
Ms O’Reilly pointed out that Ms Doherty had called her a “great girl” with whom she “never had any issues” in her statement to the investigator – arguing it indicated her behaviour during the euthanasia row “was out of character” and “an emotional reaction to an upsetting topic”.
The investigation concluded the women’s behaviour was “tantamount to misconduct” and warranted termination without notice, the tribunal was told.
The employer accepted that a disciplinary hearing should have been conducted separately to the investigation, but took the position that it would not have changed the outcome for either worker.
Both women were sent dismissal letters on June 19th, 2023, terminating their jobs on this basis, but undertaking to pay a sum equivalent to two months’ pay as a “gesture of goodwill from management, at its sole discretion”.
Adjudicator Marguerite Buckley wrote in her decisions: “All parties felt they were doing the right thing. All witnesses came across as credible and had the best interests of the horses at heart.”
She noted that the firm had failed to follow its own disciplinary procedures, and added that she did not accept that the conduct of either Ms O’Reilly or Ms Conlon warranted dismissal.
The adjudicator awarded both workers 16 weeks’ pay, €9,000 for Ms Conlon, who was full-time, and €5,500 for Ms O’Reilly, who was part-time, under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977.
She awarded a further €3,500 for a breach of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 in Ms Conlon’s case for the failure to afford her weekly rest periods. Both workers also received €100 for what the tribunal termed “technical” breaches of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994.
