Travellers claim at WRC they were discriminated against when asked to leave Iceland supermarket

A group of five young Travellers say they were discriminated against when they were told to leave an Iceland supermarket in Finglas without explanation two years ago.

The women and girls, who are aged between three and 21, have lodged complaints against Iceland Foods (Ireland) Ltd under the Equal Status Act over an incident at the store in Dublin on November 27th, 2020.

They cite race and membership of the Traveller community as the alleged grounds of discrimination, which Iceland denies.

Their solicitor, Christopher McCann, told the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) on Tuesday it would hear evidence the security guard went to find the assistant manager “within seconds” of his clients walking through the door.

Hot school meals: A close look at the ingredients list is not pretty. This is industrial food

---

Four-bed period house and mews a short walk from Greystones for €975,000

---

Have your say on ‘quiet quitting’: Do you feel pressure to work long hours?

---

Is the landlord or management company responsible for upgrading our windows?

---

“The assistant manager and security guard then required them, in full view of other customers, to leave the shop. Despite [being asked] for a reason neither provided any reason,” he said, adding that his clients had done nothing which could “objectively justify” being told to leave.

His clients were “confused and embarrassed” and felt there was a “clear implication they had been involved in some kind of wrongdoing” — but complied with the direction of the workers and left the premises.

Megan McDonnell, the eldest of the group, told the tribunal that young Traveller girls tended to have a “similar look”, including long hair, clothes and jewellery, adding their accents also tended to identify them as members of their community.

“We were all speaking [approaching the door] and I believe the security guard heard our accents as well,” she said.

Ms McDonnell said that when she asked the assistant manager for an explanation, he told her: “I don’t have to give you a reason. You must leave the shop.”

“I felt myself I’d done something wrong. I felt I’d done something I didn’t do,” she said.

Elizabeth-Jane Walsh, for the supermarket chain, put it to to her that although she had identified long hair and jewellery as markers identifying her and her companions as members of the Traveller community, a group of three similarly dressed women who left the shop just before them had not been prevented from shopping.

“I believe our strong accents identified us as well,” Ms McDonnell said. “We’re from Dublin all our lives and we haven’t got one hint of a Dublin accent,” she said.

“You didn’t have any verbal interaction with the security guard so the way you talked really has no relevance,” counsel added.

The complainant accepted that she had shopped in Iceland before and since the incident with her mother without difficulty.

“And you’re sure you don’t know why? Had there been anything that happened before?” counsel asked.

“Not in that shop,” said Ms McDonnell, adding that she had been “followed around” in other stores in the past because she was “readily identifiable” as a Traveller.

Ms Walsh said her side was faced with an “evidential deficit” in defending the case. She told the tribunal that the assistant manager who spoke with the girls had been dismissed by the supermarket over a year and a half ago for reasons unrelated to the complaints at hand. She added that the security guard, an employee of a contractor which was not party to the complaints, was not available either, having been “involved in a road traffic crash with a bus last week”.

Adjudicating officer Brian Dalton said it was within his power to summon the assistant manager to give evidence, but Ms Walsh said her client would “prefer closure in this matter” and would not be seeking an adjournment.

John Moran, the supermarket chain’s area manager for Dublin, gave evidence that all its employees received a staff handbook setting out the company policy on discrimination, which he said specifically identifies discrimination against members of the Traveller community. He said managers were “100 per cent” familiar with it and that members of the Traveller community were welcome to shop in any of its stores.

“Are members of the Traveller community frequent customers?” Ms Walsh asked him.

“Yes, absolutely,” Mr Moran said.

Mr McCann, for the complainant, asked Mr Moran how he knew Travellers were shopping in his stores.

“I can only assume they do; it’s open to the public. Some people do tell us: ‘I’m a Traveller’,” the area manager said.

Mr McCann put it to Mr Moran that an effective policy ought to inform a shop manager “how to identify a Traveller” for the purposes of avoiding discriminatory treatment.

“Not necessarily,” Mr Moran said. He said a member of the Traveller community could “possibly” be identified by their voice or accent but not by visual characteristics.

“In circumstances where no evidence of a reason for ejecting my client from the supermarket has been given and where there’s clear evidence of easy identification [as a member of the Traveller community] ... I say the burden has shifted to the respondent,” Mr McCann said in his closing argument.

“In the absence of any objective reason I would say that the respondent has failed to discharge the burden of proof,” he added.

The tribunal had earlier heard that the security guard was a Polish national and Ms Walsh said the adjudicating officer ought to “take judicial notice that a person who is not Irish would not have the ability to identify a member of the Traveller community”.

Four of the complainants have given evidence; the fifth has to be heard at a later date. Decisions on the five claims are expected in due course.