The Rotunda Hospital continued to employ a porter after a finding that he sexually harassed a 19-year-old female care assistant, leaving her in "reasonable fear" of further harassment in what is "meant to be arguably the safest place in Dublin for a woman to be or work", a tribunal has heard.
The Rotunda's head of human resources admitted there was "frustration" among some senior midwifery managers that the man had been kept on - but added that she had no power to alter the decision of a senior hospital executive at the final stage of a disciplinary process to issue only a final written warning to the man.
A barrister acting for the porter's victim said the maternity hospital was "meant to be arguably the safest place in Dublin for a woman to be or work" - but that his client was told nothing about what sanctions or restrictions the porter had received and was left in "reasonable fear" of further harassment because of his presence in the building.
The details were made public as lawyers acting for the victim, Kaitlyn Winston, opened complaints of constructive dismissal and gender discrimination against the Rotunda at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) yesterday. The statutory complaints are denied by hospital management.
Ms Winston's line manager, clinical nurse manager Jane Hickey, said the complainant told her that the porter, Mr G - whose name is subject to a reporting restriction by direction of the WRC - had "come up against her or touched her, touched off her" while she was folding scrubs.
There were discussions on handling the matter as an informal process or via mediation, the WRC heard. Ms Winston said she wanted a formal process instead because she had been informed by Mr G's line manager that the porter was "denying it to the ground".
An investigation convened under the hospital's dignity at work procedures on foot of a complaint by Ms Winston concluded that Mr G "made physical contact on 3 May 2022, as alleged in the complaint", the hearing was told.
This was "unwelcome and uninvited" and had a "significant negative impact" on Ms Winston and the complaint of sexual harassment was "on the balance of probabilities, well founded and therefore upheld", the outcome report read.
The hearing was told the Rotunda defined sexual harassment as "any form of wanted unwanted physical or verbal conduct" which created a "hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment" for an individual.
In discussions about going back to work, Ms Winston said that hospital management eventually agreed that Mr G would not be in her workspace, but would be present in the hospital.
The complainant said she came back to work early in 2023 knowing this was the position, but said she believed it "just wasn't enough" and that she thought the man ought to have been dismissed.
The tribunal heard that Ms Winston returned to work from sick leave on a date in the spring of 2023, but that after taking a break on her second shift back she encountered Mr G in a stairwell "laughing as he was coming down, and he looked at me".
"I feel it was intimidation towards me. I feel it was done purposefully. The reason, I felt, he was laughing at me was because he was still there; because I [saw] him after that long time of being off. I got a fright to be honest," she said.
She said she went directly to her line manager’s office and told Ms Hickey she felt Mr G was "laughing at her".
"Ms Hickey said she told him a joke and she would vouch for him. 'Vouch for him’ stuck in my head," she said, adding later that she believed her line manager was "biased" and did not believe her.
In her own direct evidence, Ms Hickey said: "I wasn’t defending him, I was more trying to tell Kaitlyn I had just met him; I wasn’t vouching for anyone, I can absolutely say I was with him; we shared a funny moment, a funny joke, and he left me within seconds. The door must literally have just shut. Maybe he was smiling because we had shared a funny moment, I don't know," she said.
Ms Hickey said she was not informed that the complaint against Mr G was upheld and that "no-one ever said it was unsafe to keep that porter working in my department".
The complainant’s barrister, Cillian McGovern BL, put it to her:""Because nobody said it was unsafe, a man who has sexually harassed an employee working in a maternity hospital is perfectly fine to keep there?"
"I was informed the investigations were ongoing and when they were concluded there was no founded reason for him not to be there. I’m not going to let someone work in a department that’s not safe," she said.
"You’re implying I knew - this is the first time I’ve seen it," she added.
"When you were laughing and joking [after the encounter on the stairs], did you know then?" Mr McGovern asked.
"No," the witness said.
The hospital’s head of human resources, Joanne Connolly, said: "We don’t go around telling people things they don’t need to know."
She said Mr G was served with a final written warning at the conclusion of a disciplinary process chaired by the hospital’s general secretary, Jim Hussey.
Mr G also lost a specialised allowance-paying post in the portering department and was transferred to general portering duties, but had restrictions imposed, she said.
These were that he was to work only with four specific colleagues and was "permanently removed" from any duties which could expose "women in vulnerable positions" to him, Ms Connolly said.
This meant he could "work around general areas, general wards", but could not be in clinical areas or where women were giving birth, she added.
The tribunal was told that Mr G no longer works at the Rotunda for "unconnected reasons".
Under questioning from Mr McGovern, Ms Connolly said that nobody came to management and reported that Mr G was not compliant.
She said there was "frustration" that Mr G "wasn't dismissed" among a number of managers in nursing and midwifery. The hospital’s disciplinary procedures made no provision for her to review the outcome, she added.
Questioned on the disciplinary report, she said there had been mitigation and "extenuating remorse" from Mr G.
"Did it extend as far as an apology," Mr McGovern asked.
"I don't recall an apology," the witness said.
"The difficulty for us was engaging with Ms Winston to put supports in," Ms Connolly said.
"It was very difficult to engage with her. Typically a family member would attend; it would get obstructive and heated," she added.
Mr McGovern, who was instructed by Crushell & Co Solicitors in the case, said the hospital was "meant to be arguably the safest place in Dublin for women to be" - but that after encountering the man again on the premises after his "brazen" behaviour the year before, his client had a "reasonable fear" that she would suffer further harassment.
"It pains me to say it, having had two children there, but it appears the Rotunda was happy to have a sexual harasser continue to work in it in an environment that is meant to be a materially safe place," he added.
Mark Comerford of the Irish Business and Employers’ Confederation (IBEC), for the hospital, said it acted in line with its dignity at work policy and that the complainant had not met the standard to establish a case of constructive dismissal.
He said it was hospital policy and "common policy" that disciplinary outcomes were "confidential" and "wouldn’t be disclosed to a third party."
The adjudicator, Catherine Byrne, closed the hearing and is expected to issue her decision in writing to the parties in due course.
