A LONGFORD-BASED steel manufacturer has been ordered to pay €7,500 compensation to a former employee who was exposed to several derogatory comments including “pikeys” and “itinerant” about members of the Traveller community.

The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) concluded that there was “a culture and tolerance” of derogatory terminology about Travellers at CPF Profiles, which has its headquarters in Longford Town.

The WRC ruled that the company had discriminated against a former salesman, Raymond Nevin, in breach of the Employment Equality Act 1998 on grounds of being a member of the Traveller community.

The company’s managing director accepted he had used the terminology complained about, but stated: “We live in a society where these terms are used.”

He added: “It shouldn’t happen, but it did.”

Nevin complained that he felt discriminated against in the course of his job interview and subsequent employment on the CPF’s sales team.

He claimed he had kept his identity from his employer as there was a “fear factor” of losing his job.

While Nevin acknowledged that the derogatory descriptions were not targeted at him personally or directly, he stated the language used had an impact on him and made him feel “disheartened.”

He argued that the comments constituted unfair treatment of him as a Traveller and that the feeling of being discriminated against was “horrendous and unbearable.”

The WRC heard that Nevin announced his resignation after less than a month in the job and had since emigrated.

Nevin told the WRC that he had not included a home address on his CV when he attended an interview at the company on 28 May 2024.

He claimed that CPF’s managing director has asked him if he was related to the “taxi Nevins” which he believed was for the purpose of distinguishing whether or not he was a Traveller.

Nevin explained that the “taxi Nevins” were not members of the Traveller community.

He told the WRC that he heard the managing director on a phone call on 4 June 2024 discussing how there were a lot of gardaí outside the courthouse in Longford and remarking jokingly in front of staff that “the pikeys must’ve been acting up.”

Two days later, Nevin said he overheard the managing director saying on the phone that “you will have to go to the tinkers for lead.”

On 12 June 2024, the complainant said he heard the managing director laughingly make a comment about a customer on the premises who was a Traveller by stating he was “making sure that the man put the item back that he was looking at.”

Nevin claimed he also heard the word “itinerant” being used.

He gave evidence that he was questioned by other employees if he was related to certain people with the same surname and that he was called by his family name by people he had never met before.

Nevin said he did not say he was a member of the Traveller community when he informed CPF by text that he was resigning.

He denied a claim by the managing director that he was asked to come back to work in a phone call after being notified of his resignation.

CPF claimed Nevin had never voiced any objections at work about the use of any alleged derogatory comments as it would have responded to any such complaint.

The managing director disputed claims it had discriminated against the complainant. but accepted that most of what Nevin stated was “correct.”

He claimed he was unaware at the job interview that Nevin was a Traveller but insisted it “made no difference” to him.

As an employer in a small town, he said he would ask any potential employee about their background “to know if they are good or bad workers.”

The managing director disputed asking a question about the “taxi Nevins” but accepted that he had probably used the term “pikey.”

However, he had no recollection of using the word “tinkers” and said he would not have used such a word with one of his regular customers, but he accepted that it was “quite possible” that he had uttered the word “itinerant” in “a joking fashion.”

The witness said he had previously employed other members of the Traveller community and never had any complaints

WRC adjudication officer Anne McElduff said the job interview process relating to Nevin lacked transparency in terms of how his competencies and merits were assessed.

McElduff said Nevin’s background should not have been a factor in assessing his capability to perform the job and she did not accept the managing director’s assertions that such questions were necessary.

She said she was satisfied the question about the “taxi Nevins” was asked to probe whether the complainant was a Traveller.

McElduff said the specific question could only have been asked of Nevin as opposed to any other candidate.

Ordering CPF to pay compensation of €7,500 to Nevin, the WRC also directed the company to conduct a review of its selection processes to ensure it complied with best practice in terms of equal opportunity prescribed by employment legislation.

It also directed the company to put in place an equal opportunities policy in the workplace and to provide comprehensive staff training on the issues as well as maintain a record of all such training.