Traveller who quit job over use of terms like 'pikey' awarded €7,500 for discrimination

Darragh Mc Donagh

A member of the Traveller community who quit his job at a building products firm after two weeks over the use of the “pikey”, “tinker”, and “itinerant” in the workplace has been awarded €7,500 for discrimination.

The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) also found that CPL (Profiles) Limited in Longford had discriminated against Raymond Nevin at the interview, even though he got the job.

During the interview on May 28th last year, the managing director of the company asked where Mr Nevin was from and who his father was, allegedly inquiring: “What Nevin are you from in the town, Taxi Nevin?”

Mr Nevin claimed that the questions about his name and background were aimed at establishing whether he was a Traveller. However, he was offered the job and started work two days later.

The following week, there was a significant Garda presence outside the courthouse in Longford, and Mr Nevin claimed that he heard the managing director remark: “The pikeys must have been acting up.”

It was also alleged that the managing director had used the words “tinker” and “itinerant”, and joked that he was watching a Traveller customer on the premises to ensure that he left back the item he was looking at.

Mr Nevin resigned in a text message on June 18th, 2024.

The managing director was “99% certain” that he rang Mr Nevin after receiving the text, asking him to return to work, but the complainant claimed this “never happened”.

He accepted that none of these remarks were targeted at him directly, but told the WRC that they had impacted him and made him feel “disheartened”.

He said the feeling of being discriminated against was “horrendous and unbearable”.

The managing director of the company said “most” of what Mr Nevin had submitted in his testimony was correct. It was “probable” that he had used the word “pikey”, “quite possible” that he said “itinerant”, but had no recollection of using the term “tinkers”.

If he had commented about watching a Traveller on the premises in case they shoplifted, this was a joke, he told the WRC.

The managing director said he hadn’t known whether Mr Nevin was a Traveller at the time of the interview, and that it had made no difference to him. He said his questioning about his background was intended to ascertain whether he was a good worker.

The company had previously employed members of the Traveller community, and there had never been a complaint under its grievance policy.

“We live in a society where these terms are used,” he told the adjudication hearing. “It shouldn’t happen, but it did.”

WRC adjudication officer, Anne McElduff, said there was a lack of evidence that fair and transparent selection criteria had been used in the interview process. She was “unpersuaded” by the managing director’s explanation of questions about Mr Nevin’s background.

Regardless of the fact that he got the job, Ms McElduff found that Mr Nevin’s membership of the Traveller community was an issue or consideration during the interview.

This put him in a different position by comparison to another candidate who was not a member of the Traveller community, she said, concluding that he had been discriminated against on this ground.

There was a culture and tolerance of using derogatory terminology such as “pikey” and “tinker” to describe Travellers in the workplace, Ms McElduff added. She ordered the company to pay €7,500 in compensation to Mr Nevin.

She also directed the firm to review its selection processes to ensure that they comply with best practice in terms of equal opportunity under the Employment Equality Act. Staff should also be provided with training on equal opportunity, she stated.