Dublin creche ordered to pay €14,000 in compensation to former supervisor

A Dublin creche has been ordered to pay €14,000 compensation to a former supervisor who was penalised for raising a concern about a potential breach of regulations on child/staff ratios.

The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) ruled that Ohana Day Care had unfairly penalised Arlene McGovern after she had drawn attention to a potential risk to the safety of children in the creche at a meeting on June 10th, 2021.

The WRC concluded that an investigation initiated by the creche’s owners, Anne Hartford and David Sweeney, into Ms McGovern shortly after she had raised her concern about staffing ratios was “intimidating and excessive”.

It heard Ms McGovern resigned from Ohana Day Care – which trades as Marbles Creche & Montessori in Swords, Co Dublin – on August 4th, 2021 before the investigation was concluded because she was being ignored and felt isolated.

Scottie Scheffler’s bagman may need help carrying his wallet

---

The E in Environmental, Social and Governance is fast becoming a dead letter

---

Can the management company for our development enforce mandatory use of parking app?

---

Mercedes-Benz E-Class review: new hybrid’s range is genuine, but there are compromise

---

WRC adjudication officer, Catherine Byrne, said she was satisfied that the investigation would not have been carried out but for the fact that Ms McGovern had spoken up at the meeting.

Although Ms McGovern found alternative employment within a few weeks, the WRC directed the creche to pay compensation of €14,000 – the equivalent of six months’ gross pay.

Counsel for Ms McGovern, Cathy McGrady BL, had argued that her client had been penalised under the Safety, Health and Welfare and Work Act 2005 or alternatively under whistle-blowing legislation for making a protected disclosure about the child/staff ratio issue.

Ohana Day Care claimed that Ms McGovern had merely contributed to a discussion over staffing ratios that was part of an agenda for a regular staff meeting.

Ms McGovern told the WRC that she and other colleagues were considered a nuisance for insisting on staffing lunch cover so that the creche could comply with regulations under the Child Care Act.

Ms McGovern claimed the creche subsequently “manufactured” an investigation into her to punish her after a complaint was submitted by another supervisor, Verona Clarke.

However, an investigation by an external consultant concluded there was not enough evidence that Ms McGovern had engaged in any form of inappropriate, repeated actions in the treatment of her colleague.

In her ruling, Ms Byrne said it was clear that raising a concern about the child/staff ratio in a childcare setting was covered by health and safety legislation.

Ms Byrne said she could not ignore the fact that the creche had also adversely treated two other employees who voiced concern about the staffing ratio.