A pregnant store manager who was forced to work 70-hour weeks for less than minimum wage has been awarded €55,000 by the Equality Tribunal.
In a case that was described by the inspecting equality officer as one of the worst she has ever seen, Ewelina Gacek was encouraged to work unpaid extra hours beyond midnight at the €uro 50 store in the Ilac Shopping Centre, and was denied leave for routine medical check-ups when she became pregnant.
Having initially been employed as a sales assistant on minimum wage, Ms Gacek was told by the store owners to clock out at midnight, “in case a labour inspector was snooping around their records”, but to keep working until 2 or 3am without remuneration or money for a taxi home.
She then became a trainee manager. However, the equality officer found in her favour that she was in fact performing the duties of an overall store manager without the commensurate pay rise, despite store owner’s denials that her position had been upgraded.
Her employment situation was said to have significantly deteriorated when she became pregnant.
According to Ms Gacek, toilet breaks were discouraged and she worked 11-day stretches.
She provided an email to the equality officer from the store’s administrator at the time, which read:
“I can understand that you are pregnant but I can still show you time sheets of other managers that were pregnant and still were doing 60-80 hours a week and worked till the last day.
“Only last year two managers nearly got their baby in the store . . . ”
Return to work
On her return to work in February 2013, Ms Gacek was suspended on full pay pending the outcome of an internal investigation by the company into an alleged data breach that she had perpetrated.
She was later given an official warning but resigned soon after.
Commenting on the matters presented, the equality officer cleared Ms Gacek of any wrongdoing, saying that the company had taken a “cavalier attitude” towards data protection when furnishing intimate gynaecological records of another employee that were never asked for.
The officer also noted that a picture of a “dystopian workplace” emerged from the case details, and that there seemed to be an atmosphere “filled with aggression, false promises and threats” in the store.
In summary, it was found that Ms Gacek was harassed on the grounds of race, discriminated against on grounds of gender and was victimised by her employer.
She was awarded €33,000 (18 months’ salary) along with a further €22,000 (a year’s salary) for “distress caused by victimisationary dismissal”.
Bullying judgment
In a separate judgment, an aircraft spray-painter who “feared for his life” due to workplace bullying was awarded €28,000.
Mariusz Kozak was sent to the Czech Republic by his employer Eirtech Aviation to carry out an assignment in January 2012.
Upon arrival for work, he alleged constant criticism of his performance by colleagues, one of whom intentionally splashed acid on Mr Kozak’s face.
Following an incident with his co-workers that required police intervention he was admitted to a psychiatric hospital unit, and was let go by his employer when he returned to Ireland due to "seasonal factors".
In a summary, it was found that Mr Kozak was discriminated against on grounds of disability and that the company in question had made a “unilateral decision to dismiss without involving the complainant”.
