Racecourse bookmaker claims being barred from taking bets indoors is ‘apartheid Irish style’

A racecourse bookmaker who claimed that being barred from taking bets indoors in wet weather was “apartheid Irish style” has been told he is “mistaken” in a discrimination claim against a racecourse trade body.

Jim Desmond told the Workplace Relations Commission that the operator of Mallow Racecourse refused him access to a tent at a race meeting on October 31st 2021 – and that as a result he got the “wetting of wettings” and later fell ill.

He blamed it on a “man-made discriminatory rule” by the Association of Irish Racecourses CLG (AIR) imposed by the operator at Mallow.

The allegations were made in complaints of discrimination and victimisation under the Equal Status Act 2000 against the racecourse trade body before the tribunal.

Matt Williams: Ross Byrne rising to Leinster challenge could help Ireland hit heights in South Africa

---

‘We take everyone we can’: the Ukrainians bringing Russian bodies off the battlefield

---

‘Jesus Christ, the doors are locked’: The full story of the Stardust fire, with new testimony

---

Family affairs: How Ireland’s newly rich are putting money to work in secretive firms

---

Mr Desmond said his competitors, including “High Street” bookies, “phone betters” and the Tote were all “allowed indoors or outdoors depending on the weather” but that on-course bookmakers such as himself “are not allowed use the available indoor facilities”, which he said were “lying idle”.

“This is apartheid Irish style,” Mr Desmond said.

He said the situation for course bookies in the rain at Mallow and Tipperary was inferior to what was offered elsewhere – arguing that there was suitable shelter available for them at Limerick Racecourse, while Tramore Racecourse had a canopy at the betting ring for wet days.

Mr Desmond, who told the hearing he had been attending race meetings at Mallow for 70 years, said he wasn’t looking for any “financial recompense” for his complaint, only a “happy ending” in the form of improved facilities.

At a hearing last November into his complaints, Mr Desmond told the WRC he was seeking to progress his claim on the grounds of disability “in terms of his enduring compromised mobility and a number of associated medical conditions”.

However, he accepted that he had not given details of any disability or other protected characteristic when he served the racecourse trade association with a statutory notification form.

The dispute came before the WRC in circumstances where Mr Desmond said he had no confidence the Irish Bookmakers’ Association dispute resolution mechanism to resolve the matter – though AIR had maintained a “careful application” of betting ring pitch rules could have solved it.

Association of Irish Racecourses chairman Paddy Walsh, responding to the claim, said Mr Desmond “had neglected to link his complaint of discrimination to any of the prescribed grounds”.

He said the association had no role in the design of the racecourse betting rings where Mr Desmond would set out his stall, as this was “firmly in the domain” of the racecourse operators.

In her decision, adjudicating officer Patsy Doyle wrote that she could not accept Mr Desmond had a protected disability and that it was clear he had not been refused service by AIR, as the complainant had paid the racecourse itself for his “turf”.

There had not been “any less favourable treatment” by AIR against Mr Desmond, who had not raised a prima facie case,” she wrote, calling it a “commercial dispute”.

“I have decided not to dismiss the claim as requested by the respondent. I found that the complainant approached the case in the genuine belief that he was treated less favourably on grounds of disability. He honestly believed that the WRC would provide him with a fair hearing. However, following my completed investigation, I must find that he is mistaken in his claim for victimisation on this occasion,” Ms Doyle concluded.