Cleaner wins sex harassment suit

A cleaner who was sexually harassed has won the maximum possible award under the Employment Equality Acts.

The Equality Tribunal awarded €21,000, the equivalent of 104 weeks salary, to the woman who worked as a cleaner at a shopping centre in a midlands town.

It found that she was was "subjected to the most appalling attack on her personal dignity" when she was harassed by a security guard who worked for another company at the centre.

In making the award, Mr Vivian Jackson, equality officer of the tribunal, said he was "constrained by the statute in the level of compensation which I could order".

If he was not constrained, he said he would have ordered "a significantly higher award, given the severity of the treatment to which the complainant was subjected". The woman, known as Ms A in the case, said the security guard had made crude and sexually offensive remarks to her and her female colleagues since she began working with him in February 2000.

The harassment culminated in an incident in December 2000, where he pushed her into the staff canteen, pulled down her trousers and underwear and smacked her on the bare bottom a number of times. He then laughed loudly and left the room.

This was witnessed by Ms A's female company supervisor who said the harasser was only "messing" and "it was only a joke", she said. The security guard approached the victim later that night again and she was forced to fend him off by swinging a mop at him.

Ms A reported the incident to the Garda and raised it with the regional manager of the contract cleaning company. He told her it had nothing to do with the cleaning company and to take the matter up with the security guard's company. She did this and said she then experienced the "cold shoulder" from some colleagues and her good working relationship with them deteriorated. Ms A said she was threatened with dismissal if she did not drop her complaint to the Garda so she withdrew her statement.

When she was later subjected to her employer's internal disciplinary procedure, the sexual harassment incident was raised. Ms A said her supervisor inferred that she was lying, saying "who'd believe Ms A anyway"?