A care home nurse who was cornered in a room by a dementia patient "touching himself" and was racially abused by another patient who she said was in the habit of becoming drunk and "aggressive" has won €30,000 in compensation.
The incidents with two male patients were referred to the employment tribunal by Vanessa Rodrigues-Linhan in a complaint under the Employment Equality Act 1998 she lodged against Carechoice Swords 2 Ltd shortly before she handed in her notice last year.
Giving evidence, Ms Rodrigues-Linhan told the Workplace Relations Commission that one patient, Mr A, was "aggressive" and "would often leave the home and return drunk" - a particular issue for the night shift, she said.
She said that on 20 December 2022 Mr A came back from an evening in the pub and became "angry and abusive" - leaving his room in his underwear, going to the nurses' station and saying "very racist things" to her.
Adjudicator David James Murphy noted that Ms Rodrigues-Linhan was "quite upset" as she gave her evidence on this and her employer's representative at the hearing on 17 October last agreed she did not need to repeat the exact words Mr A used.
Mr A then took up a Christmas decoration and pushed it into her chest, the complainant said, adding that she was "terrified" and felt "vulnerable" as there were few staff around.
Her evidence was that there were three healthcare assistants and two nurses to look after 46 patients on the home's night shift.
Days after complaining about Mr A to human resources, she met the man in the kitchen of the home, where he "began shouting racial abuse", the worker stated in her evidence.
This included calling her a "stupid black woman" and telling her to "go back to her country", the tribunal noted.
The complainant's case was that Mr B was a dementia patient with whom there were "well known issues", including that he would "touch himself in public" and "try to touch residents".
Ms Rodrigues-Linhan told the tribunal Mr B entered another resident’s room where she was working "touching himself" and "trying to get her to go into his room".
Mr A "ended up cornering her in the room while touching herself" and did not retreat until Ms Rodriques-Linhan took up a can of deodorant, the tribunal was told.
She said she was left "really shaken", but the view from the nurses was that as the man had dementia, "he is like that and these kind of things can happen".
The home’s director of nursing and assistant director of nursing were were both granted anonymity by the adjudicator in his decision.
The assistant director said of Mr A, who the worker had accused of getting drunk and racially abusing her: "He’s allowed to go in and out of the home as he pleases. It’s his right to do so. He is much better now and doesn’t stay out late anymore."
The director of nursing said the patient was "part of the community""and had been "apologetic" when he was informed that he had intimidated the complainant.
In his decision, WRC adjudicator David James Murphy noted that although the care plan for Mr A referred to "aggressive behaviour", Ms Rodrigues-Linhan believed there was no reference to the risks involved with looking after Mr B in the relevant documents for him.
The company produced the plan for Mr B, which included "entries from a year before the complainant's issues noting his sexual approaches to residents, nurses and carers".
It also provided "bullet points on how to manage interventions", Mr Murphy said.
"It is not clear how visible these entries would have been to the complainant a year later," he said.
The adjudicator, Mr Murphy, said Ms Rodrigues-Linhan had been subjected to "serious racial and sexual harassment which made her legitimately fear for her safety" in the two separate incidents.
The adjudicator said it seemed action was taken after the complainant reported Patient A’s behaviour, but he found that the employer "failed to establish that there were efforts in place to manage the risk he presented" prior to this.
Although it was "well known" that Patient B "behaved in a sexual manner" towards staff and other patients, there was "no process in place to ensure information and advice was cascading down to carers on the night shift", he added.
He remarked that the director of nursing and assistant director of nursing "appeared to be considered and professional people" who tried to address issues when they became aware of them.
However, he said that in a case of harassment, the most important tier of management was the worker’s immediate supervisor being "on hand to actually react to incidents and risks".
"More senior staff offering support after the fact is no substitute for this," Mr Murphy wrote. He found the employer had failed to make out its defence.
Ruling the complaint "well founded", he ordered the company to pay Ms Rodrigues-Linhan €30,000 in compensation.
