In Automatic Amusements Ltd v Puisor (EDA2632), the Labour Court overturned an earlier Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) decision and awarded an employee €20,000 in compensation after finding that she had experienced gender-based harassment by customers.
The decision highlights the importance of employers taking proactive measures to prevent harassment, responding appropriately to complaints and ensuring that employees are protected from discriminatory treatment, regardless of who is responsible for the behaviour.
Background to the Case
The employee worked as a croupier in a casino operated by Automatic Amusements Ltd from September 2016 until her resignation in November 2023.
During her employment, she alleged that she had been subjected to repeated verbal abuse, aggressive behaviour and physically threatening conduct from male customers.
She also claimed that she was treated less favourably than male colleagues and that management had failed to take appropriate measures to protect her from the behaviour she experienced.
One incident involved a customer becoming aggressive after the employee mistakenly pushed winnings towards another customer. The customer stood up, pushed his chair and raised his hand in a threatening manner.
The employee maintained that the incident left her frightened and contributed to an intimidating and hostile working environment.
The employer disputed aspects of her account and argued that the customer's conduct was not connected to her gender.
The employee initially brought a complaint to the WRC, which found that she had not established a sufficient basis for her discrimination claim.
She subsequently appealed the decision to the Labour Court.
What Did the Labour Court Decide?
The Labour Court overturned the WRC decision and found that the employee had been subjected to harassment on the gender ground, contrary to the Employment Equality Acts.
The Court accepted the employee's evidence concerning the hostile and aggressive working environment and concluded that her gender was the likely explanation for the treatment she experienced.
Importantly, the employer had not provided witness evidence to substantiate its challenges to the employee's account.
The Court also found that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the employer had taken appropriate preventative measures to protect employees from harassment.
In particular, there was no evidence that an effective anti-harassment policy had been communicated to employees during the relevant period.
The Labour Court determined that the employer had failed to adequately protect the employee from discriminatory treatment and awarded €20,000 in compensation.
Can Employers Be Responsible for the Actions of Customers?
One of the most significant aspects of this decision is the confirmation that employers can be held responsible for discriminatory harassment carried out by customers and other third parties.
Under Section 14A of the Employment Equality Act 1998, harassment connected to a protected discriminatory ground may constitute discrimination in relation to an employee's conditions of employment.
The legislation expressly addresses harassment by individuals with whom an employer might reasonably expect an employee to come into contact during their employment.
This can include customers, clients, contractors and other individuals who are not directly employed by the organisation.
However, employers may have a statutory defence where they can demonstrate that they took reasonably practicable steps to prevent harassment and, where harassment occurred, to prevent further adverse treatment and reverse its effects.
In this case, the Labour Court was not satisfied that the employer had demonstrated such measures.
The fact that the harassment was carried out by customers rather than employees did not remove the employer's legal responsibilities.
What Constitutes Harassment Under Employment Equality Legislation?
Under Irish employment equality legislation, harassment involves unwanted conduct related to a protected discriminatory ground that has the purpose or effect of violating a person's dignity and creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.
Protected grounds include gender, civil status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, age, disability, race and membership of the Traveller community.
Importantly, not every instance of inappropriate or aggressive behaviour will automatically constitute discriminatory harassment under the Employment Equality Acts.
There must be a connection between the unwanted conduct and a protected discriminatory ground.
In this case, the Labour Court concluded that the employee's gender was the likely explanation for the behaviour directed towards her.
What Does This Mean for Employers?
This decision is particularly relevant to employers operating in customer-facing environments, including retail, hospitality, healthcare, entertainment and professional services.
However, the principles apply across all sectors where employees interact with customers, clients or other third parties.
Employers should consider the following:
1. Ensure Anti-Harassment Policies Cover Third Parties
Workplace dignity and respect policies should clearly establish that harassment by customers, clients, contractors and visitors will not be tolerated.
Policies should explain how employees can raise concerns and the steps the organisation may take in response.
2. Communicate Policies Effectively
Simply having an anti-harassment policy is not sufficient.
Employers should ensure employees understand the policy, know how to report concerns and are confident that complaints will be addressed appropriately.
Training should also be provided to managers responsible for responding to workplace incidents.
3. Take Complaints Seriously
Where an employee reports inappropriate behaviour by a customer or another third party, employers should respond promptly and assess the circumstances.
Depending on the seriousness of the incident, appropriate action may include investigating the complaint, issuing warnings to customers, restricting access to the premises or implementing additional protective measures.
4. Assess Risks in Customer-Facing Roles
Employers should consider whether particular roles expose employees to an increased risk of aggressive, threatening or discriminatory behaviour.
Where risks are identified, appropriate preventative measures should be implemented.
These may include additional security arrangements, escalation procedures, management support and training on handling difficult customer interactions.
5. Maintain Appropriate Records
Employers should document complaints, investigations, actions taken and any follow-up measures.
Maintaining clear records is particularly important where an employer may subsequently need to demonstrate that reasonably practicable steps were taken to prevent or address harassment.
6. Do Not Dismiss Behaviour as Part of the Job
Employees working in customer-facing roles should not be expected to tolerate discriminatory or threatening behaviour simply because dealing with difficult customers is part of their employment.
Employers must take reasonable steps to provide a working environment free from discriminatory harassment.
The WorkWise Perspective
This decision serves as an important reminder that an employer's duty to protect employees does not stop at the actions of its own workforce.
While employers cannot control every interaction between employees and customers, they are expected to take reasonable and effective measures to prevent discriminatory harassment and respond appropriately when incidents occur.
The absence of an effectively communicated anti-harassment policy was a particularly significant issue in this case.
For employers, this reinforces the importance of ensuring that workplace policies are not simply documents maintained for compliance purposes, but are actively communicated, understood and implemented.
The decision also demonstrates the potential financial consequences of failing to take appropriate action.
The key takeaway for employers is clear: when an employee experiences discriminatory harassment at work, the identity of the person responsible does not automatically remove the employer's liability.
Employers should ensure that employees feel supported in reporting concerns and that managers are equipped to respond effectively.
At WorkWise HR Solutions, we support employers in developing workplace dignity and respect policies, managing employee complaints and ensuring appropriate procedures are in place to address harassment and discrimination.
Our approach focuses on practical, proportionate and legally compliant HR solutions that protect both employees and businesses.
Need support reviewing your workplace harassment policies or managing an employee complaint? Contact WorkWise HR Solutions for professional HR guidance and support.
Case Reference: Automatic Amusements Ltd v Puisor (EDA2632)
Original WRC Decision: ADJ-00048789
Labour Court Decision Date: 17 July 2026
Outcome: €20,000 awarded to the employee.
Disclaimer: This article is provided for general information purposes and does not constitute legal advice.