Waterford charity ordered to pay landmark fee to whistleblower
The Waterford Intellectual Disability Association (WIDA) has been ordered to pay over €320,000 to a senior manager of the organisation.
By a considerable margin, this is the largest award ever made by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) under the Protected Disclosures Act, a framework which ensures that workers who raise concerns about wrongdoings in their workplace are protected from penalisation.
The complainant in this case, Ms. Fiona O’Neill, claimed that she was penalised after making protected disclosures against senior WIDA management.
WIDA is a community based voluntary provider of services for adults and children with intellectual disabilities and autism in Waterford. It is a registered charity, with a voluntary Board of Directors, and is fully funded by the HSE.
Ms. Fiona O’Neill, a senior employee of WIDA, gave detailed evidence of her experience working within the charity to the WRC, spanning over a period of four years, of what she described as “pure torture” inflicted on her by the former Chair of the WIDA Board.
On foot of this treatment, Ms. O'Neill made protected disclosures about alleged wrongdoing by senior management within WIDA.
Those disclosures concerned allegations of bullying, harassment, governance and financial issues which she viewed as wrongdoings by the Chairperson and/or members of the Board of Management.
In those circumstances, the Chair and or Board procured the services of a consulting firm to carry out an organisational review.
In her documents, WRC Adjudication Officer Gaye Cunningham noted that an investigation into bullying and harassment by one EMT member against the chairman had now essentially morphed into a "root and branch review of the organisation without any or any adequate explanation”.
Arising from findings within the flawed reports, Ms. O’Neill was effectively demoted from her position through the appointment of a new interim CEO who took over her duties. Ms. O'Neill claimed that this act was an attempt to demote her because of the protected disclosures she had made.
Ms. O’Neill was informed of this information during a meeting which lasted under a minute, in which she was told that the interim CEO would be starting the following day.
The former Chair of WIDA was also alleged to have made comments to the effect that he would be installing an interim CEO who “hates whistleblowers” and that he would “see [Ms O’Neill] out of WIDA before he would go anywhere”.
It was contended by Ms. O'Neill that WIDA also began initiating a process to recruit a permanent CEO to perform her role in whole or in part, thereby effectively demoting her.
Ms. O'Neill submitted that she suffered that detriment for having made protected disclosures.
Ms O’Neill and her trade union, the Psychiatric Nurses’ Association (PNA) took issue with the independence and fairness of this process, and its recommendations.
In summing up Ms. O'Neill's case, Mr. Shaun Boylan BL, said it is clear that on foot of protected disclosures made by the complainant, she had been treated adversely on the extreme end of the spectrum.
He referred to the long road travelled by the Complainant in seeking justice. From the bullying and harassment complaint which could be said to have been the catalyst for the subsequent behaviour of the Chair and Secretary of the Board, to the engagement of consultants designed to demote the complainant.
Taking all the evidence into account, Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer, Gaye Cunningham, concluded that the actions of WIDA clearly constituted penalisation in the form of demotion and transfer of duties.
Ms. Cunningham noted: "I find that the respondent penalised the complainant in a most egregious manner throughout a long period and was fully aware of the protected disclosures made by the Complainant."
The Waterford Intellectual Disability Association offered no evidence and conceded the case in full.
Ms. Cunningham ordered the Waterford Intellectual Disability Association (WIDA) to take a number of actions on foot of her decision.
WIDA have been ordered to quash the recommendations contained within the flawed reports procured by the charity, bring to an end the role of interim CEO and acknowledge the role of Ms. O'Neill as de facto CEO and most senior executive reporting to the Board.
The charity has also been ordered to offer a full and unequivocal apology to the complainant for the mistreatment she suffered during the period July 2023 to May 2025.
WIDA is required to pay a total sum of €323,240 under the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 to the complainant.
Kavanagh and Co solicitors have confirmed that the charity has since replaced its board and has issued an apology to the complainant.
