Solicitor ordered to pay €21,000 after firing secretary over pregnancy

Seán McCárthaigh

A north Dublin solicitor has been ordered to pay €21,000 in compensation to her former legal secretary who was fired a few weeks after notifying her employer that she was pregnant.

The Workplace Relations Commission ruled that Ashimedua Okonkwo who operates as Cyril & Co Solicitors in Balbriggan, Co Dublin, has breached the Employment Equality Act 1998 by discriminating against Michele Merrigan on grounds of gender.

Ms Merrigan, who is a native of Brazil, claimed that she had been dismissed without reasonable explanation in March 2024 after 13 months in her job.

She said she had been given the excuse that her dismissal was for gross misconduct and implemented without any investigation, disciplinary process or right of appeal.

The claim of unfair dismissal was denied by Ms Okonkwo who maintained Ms Merrigan’s employment was terminated for gross misconduct due to significant mistakes in her work.

The solicitor claimed the legal secretary had given one client the wrong court date, which resulted in a bench warrant being issued for him, while she claimed another client was facing a deportation order because Ms Merrigan was responsible for his appeal not being processed.

Ms Okonkwo noted that both clients were considering reporting her legal practice to the Legal Services Regulatory Authority.

She also claimed that the complainant’s actions and inactions had caused “a lot of embarrassment” for her legal firm in relation to several other clients.

However, Ms Merrigan said the argument that a series of administrative errors by her could amount to gross misconduct, even if proven, was “unsustainable.”

She said a more plausible explanation for her dismissal was her status as a pregnant woman which presented an inconvenience for Ms Okonkwo.

The WRC heard that Ms Merrigan had obtained a sick note on February 21st, 2024 – a week after she had been informed of her rights and obligations relating to her pregnancy.

She told the WRC that she was made to feel guilty for being pregnant and became stressed as a result of receiving frequent queries about her due date and how long she was going to be away from work after going out sick.

Ms Merrigan told the WRC that she was emailed a letter of termination on March 14th, 2024 without being given any opportunity to defend herself.

It occurred on the day that the client, who was the subject of a bench warrant, had visited the office.

She claimed the offices of Cyril & Co were always extremely busy and quite disorganised and she felt that Ms Okonkwo was overwhelmed.

Her barrister, Eoin Morris BL, claimed Ms Okonkwo’s letter of dismissal was “entirely predetermined and contrived.”

However, Ms Okonkwo claimed Ms Merrigan had berated and verbally abused the client in her office and accused him of being drunk and stupid before eventually acknowledging she had given him the wrong court date.

The solicitor said it was “all too much” to have a grown man crying in her office.

The solicitor said she very quickly came to the conclusion that she had lost all trust and confidence in her secretary and had no option but to terminate her employment immediately.

In evidence, Ms Okonkwo said she would never have dismissed Ms Merrigan for the error but claimed the dismissal was due to her behaviour to the client.

Ms Okonkwo said she was overjoyed at the news when informed in January 2024 that Ms Merrigan was pregnant.

WRC adjudication officer, Patricia Owens, ruled that the solicitor had pursued the matter of Ms Merrigan’s due dates with “a degree of persistence” which she found “intrusive” as well as “wholly unnecessary and inappropriate.”

Ms Owens acknowledged both parties had given evidence of a positive working relationship up to Ms Merrigan giving notice of her pregnancy but differed about their relationship thereafter.

She said there was no previous history of issues being raised by Ms Okonkwo prior to the dismissal itself in relation to Ms Merrigan’s behaviour or performance.

Ms Owens said she did not accept the solicitor’s explanation that she was so overwhelmed on the day of the dismissal that she did not include the correct reason for the dismissal in the termination letter and instead included things “as they came to mind.”

The WRC official noted Ms Okonkwo is an experienced solicitor who fully understands the importance of “getting it right” with letters of dismissal.

“No competent solicitor would have made such basic mistakes,” said Ms Owens.

She said Ms Merrigan had accepted her error about the court date and that she had an altercation with a client.

Ms Owens said she was unclear about the severity of the altercation due to a disparity in the evidence of witnesses.

She concluded that Ms Okonkwo’s failure to follow any semblance of due process and to accurately record the reason for dismissal in the letter of termination were fatal to her defence.