A helpdesk worker who was made redundant after accusing his female team leads of discrimination over their alleged handling of a complaint he raised about being subjected to misandrist abuse from a customer has won €10,000 for penalisation.
The worker, Mark Wells, was among the 10% of Shopify staff who were let go en masse on 26 July last year – but was the only member of his team to go, he told the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC).
Mr Wells lodged a series of statutory complaints against Shopify International Ltd, trading as Shopify, but only proceeded with one claim of victimisation in breach of the Employment Equality Act 1998 when his case was called on last June.
Solicitors Alastair Purdy and Co, appearing for Mr Wells, submitted to the tribunal that Mr Wells had been subjected to gender-based abuse from a business customer who used foul language and made "wild accusations" of domestic abuse against his client during a 1 February 2021 phone call.
More "racist comments, personal insults and sexual harassment" followed by email to the firm about Mr Wells after the call, the tribunal was told.
"No idea how to listen, so full of himself he flaunts it… After years of domestic violence I would presume this guy is beating up on his partner. So precious he is frightened of swearing," read the email, which was submitted in evidence.
"I would not recommend him to anyone! I would rather[have] rung the Philippines," the email continued.
A second email from the customer branded Mr Wells and "arrogant arsehole" and a "loser".
Instead of "condemning" the behaviour, Mr Wells' team leader apologised to the customer and told her the complainant was getting a warning and would be sent for "coaching", Mr Wells’ solicitor added.
Mr Wells lodged an internal grievance stating: "The use of my sex against me makes me wonder how homophobic or sex-based comments directed at females compared to male staff is handled," the WRC was told.
He added that the company "blamed me, appeased the merchant who abused, bullied, sexually harassed [and] threatened me while also expressing a racist and xenophobic comment".
Mr Wells’ grievance was rejected in May 2021 but was upheld on appeal later that summer, the tribunal heard. The firm’s managing director praised him for "making a stand" and gave assurance the company would "learn from the experience".
Mr Wells took the view that he had been "fobbed off", the WRC heard, and filed a second grievance with his line manager in June 2022 accusing six female colleagues of discrimination. He stated in the second grievance that he had been the subject of "misandry" from the merchant but had himself been "blamed" for what happened.
"I realised that I was treated differently by the named Leads by being male. In the age of MeToo, and even before it, any woman subjected to abuse including misogyny, would have been supported in a totally different way," Mr Wells wrote in his grievance.
"I identify as male. I was subject to misandry. All leadership involved… identify as female," he wrote.
Later that same day, Mr Wells’ line manager launched disciplinary proceedings against him, the tribunal was told. The disciplinary process was stopped on 18 July that year and Mr Wells’ second grievance was examined over the following week, with an outcome issued on 25 July rejecting his complaint, the WRC was told.
He was notified of redundancy the following day, it was submitted.
Mr Wells stated in evidence that he was the only worker made redundant on his team, though 10% of the global workforce were also let go that day. He added that he was never provided with any statement explaining the criteria used to select him for redundancy.
Rosemary Mallon BL, appeared for Shopify instructed by DLA Piper, told the WRC that it was "unfortunate that the complainant’s position was impacted" but that it "had nothing to do with his grievance", according to the adjudicator’s summary of legal submissions.
The company’s position was: "The unfortunate reality is, the ICT sector has experienced significant economic retraction in recent times. The claimant’s role was selected for redundancy as it was no longer required by the business."
Adjudicator Louise Boyle wrote that Mr Wells’ evidence had been "credible" and, given that no company witnesses took the stand – not controverted.
"I find that the complainant was victimised by his dismissal by raising grievance two, and the respondent has not discharged the statutory or evidential burden of proving compliance with the Acts," Ms Boyle wrote.
She awarded Mr Wells €10,000 in compensation.
There was no ruling on the substance of the discrimination claims raised by Mr Wells with his employer, which were not before the tribunal as Mr Wells went ahead with only the claim of victimisation.
