A hospital pharmacist who did not meet the minimum requirement to apply for a promotion because she worked part-time has been awarded €20,000 for discrimination.
The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) heard that Marie Ronan had been employed by the Health Service Executive since October 2008.
She took up a position as a senior clinical pharmacist in 2015 on a job-share basis.
In 2024, the HSE sought to recruit for the new grade of advanced pharmacist specialist. Ms Ronan believed she was qualified to apply as she had 15 years of experience, including nine that included work in the specialist area of antimicrobial stewardship.
When she applied, however, she was rejected on the basis that she did not meet the requirement that the specialist element of her work make up 50 per cent of a full-time role over at least a two-year period.
In correspondence, the WRC heard, she pointed out that she had comfortably more than the minimum amount of specialist experience required but that it had been acquired over a longer period. She contended that this should qualify her for consideration.
In response, the HSE said the specified requirement regarding the time frame had, along with the wider criteria, been drawn up by a panel of experts and been the subject of discussions by various industrial relations groups within the organisation.
Despite this, Ms Ronan argued that the requirement was likely to disproportionately impact workers such as herself who had taken part-time roles in order to meet family needs. Most of these would be women.
The requirement, she said, effectively made it impossible for her to apply for the job, despite the HSE accepting in its submissions that she was “a long-standing, well-qualified and highly-regarded member of staff”.
Ms Ronan argued that the position adopted by the HSE with regard to the process for filling the new posts was indirectly discriminatory towards her and constituted a breach of the Employment Equality Act.
In his ruling, WRC adjudication officer Brian Dolan said that while there was the provision under the Act for an employer to establish there had been an objective justification for a provision that might otherwise be found to be indirectly discriminatory, it had failed to do so in this instance.
In his decision, he said: “It remains unclear as to why an applicant cannot rely on experience aggregated over a longer period, which would provide the same level of overall experience required for the role, without excluding those engaged on certain part-time contracts.”
He awarded Ms Ronan €20,000, partly due to the consideration that she may have lost earnings but also, he said, to serve as a deterrent.
He also ordered the HSE to review its minimum criteria for applications for the role and meet Ms Ronan to discuss its conclusions.