HSE ordered to pay €20,000 compensation to pharmacist discriminated against as part-time worker

Seán McCárthaigh

The HSE has been ordered to pay €20,000 compensation to a senior pharmacist who lost out on promotion because of a discriminatory job requirement that negatively affected part-time workers.

The Workplace Relations Commission ruled that the HSE has breached the Employment Equality Act 1998 by discriminating against Marie Ronan on grounds of gender and family status.

It also found that the HSE had subjected the pharmacist to less favourable treatment in breach of the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act 2001.

The WRC heard Ms Ronan was deemed by the HSE not to have met the qualifying criteria for the new role of advanced specialist pharmacist due to her working on a part-time, job share basis.

One of the criteria set for the position within the HSE was “experience within a hospital setting” with a minimum of two years working at least on a half-time basis.

Ms Ronan claimed she was eminently qualified for the role when it was created in late 2024.

However, her application was rejected at the initial screening process due to her working fewer than half of the normal hours in the required specialist area.

The HSE claimed the job criteria had been determined by an expert working group to ensure that adequately qualified candidates applied for the role.

It pointed out that the job criteria had also been the subject of negotiations by the relevant bodies within an industrial relations process.

The HSE rejected the claim that Ms Ronan had been treated unlawfully or discriminated against either directly or indirectly.

Ms Ronan said she had worked as a clinical pharmacist for 15 years, of which nine had been spent in the relevant speciality.

She claimed roles within the HSE were historically based on aggregated experience rather than a specific whole-time equivalent threshold.

WRC adjudication officer, Brian Dolan, said it was clear that Ms Ronan is a long-standing, well-qualified and highly regarded pharmacist within the HSE for over 17 years.

Mr Dolan said it was apparent that the criterion set by the HSE in relation to having worked a minimum of 0.5 WTE (whole time equivalent) constitutes indirect discrimination.

He pointed out past rulings which demonstrated that part-time work, particularly due to familial commitments, is predominantly availed of by women.

Mr Dolan said the job requirement set by the HSE expressly prohibited anybody working below a certain threshold from being considered for a senior role regardless of their overall experience or consideration of other factors.

He said it was not apparent why the HSE would require a “minimum level of service” of over 50 per cent of time in the role.

“It remains unclear as to why an applicant cannot rely on experience aggregated over a longer period, which would provide the same level of overall experience required for the role, without excluding those engaged on certain part-time contracts,” said Mr Dolan.

While the HSE had a right, if not an obligation, to set certain standards and eligibility criteria for roles within the health services, particularly for jobs involving the distribution of controlled substances within a hospital environment, the WRC official said such a responsibility does not allow it to indirectly discriminate against job applicants without establishing an objective justification for doing so.

Awarding Ms Ronan compensation of €20,000, Mr Dolan said it was in recognition that she may have suffered a loss of earnings by having her application rejected.

He also directed the HSE to review its eligibility criteria for the role of advanced specialist pharmacist.