Former McInerney Holdings managing director Barry O'Connor has told an Employment Appeals Tribunal he was "bullied" and "harassed" out of his role at the company, and is seeking compensation from the building group for unfair dismissal.

The tribunal, which is not a court, can award up to two years’ pay to a successful claimant in compensation for their unfair dismissal. The tribunal heard that Mr O’Connor received a salary of €446,930, with pension contributions of €56,306 and expenses of €24,140 a year while working for the property company.

However, as McInerney’s financial troubles deepened in 2010, Mr O’Connor and his fellow executives took pay cuts.

This left him with what would have been a salary in the region of €267,000 had he stayed for the full year.

Spanish operations
Mr O'Connor's claim dates back to his departure as managing director in April 2010.

At the time, the company said Mr O’Connor had indicated his interest in potentially acquiring the group’s Spanish operations as part of the restructuring process, and had agreed for him to be excused from his executive responsibilities until this process was complete.

At yesterday’s hearing, Mr O’Connor said he was faced with a corporate ambush at a board meeting in April 2010, where it was voted eight to one that he step aside from his role.

Daragh Breen, for Mr O’Connor, said a letter was sent about his client in January 2009, which stated the other directors had lost confidence in him. He said this letter started a campaign which culminated in the meeting on April 1st, 2010, where Mr O’Connor was faced with a “corporate ambush”.

Mr O’Connor said the directors wanted him out because he would not be supportive of the restructuring decision.

Tom Mallon, for McInerney, said Mr O’Connor’s resignation was “voluntary”. “Mr O’Connor wants special treatment that was not afforded to the thousand other employees that lost their jobs.”

He told Mr O’Connor and the tribunal that McInerney Holdings had no money and was scheduled to be struck off by the Companies Office as it had not complied with its statutory obligations to file returns.

Returns not filed
He said the company had not filed returns because it had no money to do so. "My client has no money. It is not in a position to pay. It has no assets."

Mr O’Connor retorted: “You’re sitting here so I presume it has cash to pay you. You asked me to prove whether it has cash. I do know you’re sitting here so I presume it has cash to pay you.”

The hearing was adjourned until December 18th.