Doctors had advised it would be best for the man to continue with a regular work routine following his diagnosis with Alzheimer\u2019s disease in 2022, the tribunal was told. <\/p>\n
The man had been an employee of the company since 2005, and had spent over a decade in a managerial post when his medical condition was first identified. <\/p>\n
Lawyers acting for the worker argued he had been subjected to harassment within a month of his diagnosis, when it was alleged a remark was made to him that he was \u201cworking too slowly\u201d. <\/p>\n
It was further alleged the retailer discriminated against the man when he was demoted from his managerial post to sales assistant a year and a half after the diagnosis. <\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/1784941632_380_1784803479672-9ae96ac7-c636-4bcb-998c-c0aedcc60931.jpeg\"\/)
Aer Lingus job cuts and Ryanair\u2019s profits plunge – what is happening in the Irish aviation sector?<\/p>\n
The business denied discriminating against the man in any regard, with its representative arguing he was \u201cassisted until declared medically unfit\u201d. <\/p>\n
The man\u2019s partner told the WRC she \u201caccepted that a time would come when he needed to stop working\u201d, but that he intended to continue working a full week. <\/p>\n
One of the recommendations by occupational health was to set out written instructions for work, including \u201cplanograms\u201d of how the shelves were to be stocked, the tribunal heard. <\/p>\n
This was not done, however, with a deputy store manager telling the tribunal there was no room to post up the instructions without blocking prices. <\/p>\n
A grocery manager said he observed the complainant to \u201cwander off tasks occasionally\u201d and to leave stock on the floor, which was a \u201cpotential hazard\u201d. <\/p>\n
A store manager said he sought a detailed medical report in June 2025 as he had noticed a \u201cdeterioration\u201d in the claimant\u2019s work and \u201cdid not want an incident to arise with the store left liable\u201d. <\/p>\n
He put the claimant on paid sick leave \u201cfor his own wellbeing\u201d, he said. <\/p>\n
In July 2025, the complainant attended a specialist who sent a report to the store manager confirming he was \u201cfit to work in his current role with accommodations\u201d, the tribunal was told. <\/p>\n
However, a further occupational health review later that month \u201cquestioned whether he was fit\u201d. It said he was \u201cunlikely fit for work\u201d but left the final decision up to management, the tribunal heard. <\/p>\n
Adjudication officer Shay Clinton ruled that the employer had failed to provide reasonable accommodation for the worker\u2019s disability, and directed it to pay \u20ac25,000 in compensation. <\/p>\n
There seemed to be \u201cno plan or enquiries made on what appropriate support was available\u201d for the worker apart from sending him to occupational health and some advice from HR, Mr Clinton wrote. <\/p>\n
This brought about a \u201cvacuum\u201d where \u201cmatters unfolded on an ad-hoc basis without any expertise or independent assessment on appropriate adaptations\u201d, Clinton added. <\/p>\n
\u201cUndoubtedly, the store management were doing their best, although without the necessary expertise or support,\u201d Clinton wrote. <\/p>\n
Clinton found the worker was too late to pursue a discrimination complaint over his reduction in grade. The claim of harassment was also \u201ctoo remote\u201d and had not been substantiated in evidence, he wrote.<\/p>\n
Cathy McGrady appeared for the claimant, instructed by Farell McElwee Solicitors in the matter. The company was represented by Dajana Sinik from business group Ibec. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A retailer has been directed to pay \u20ac25,000 in compensation for disability discrimination to a worker with Alzheimer\u2019s…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":602888,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[73],"tags":[79,18,19,17,80,81],"class_list":["post-602887","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-business","tag-business","tag-eire","tag-ie","tag-ireland","tag-work","tag-workplace-relations-commission"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@ie\/116977942355732826","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/602887","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=602887"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/602887\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/602888"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=602887"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=602887"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=602887"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}