A security guard who claimed he was subjected to sexually threatening remarks by a colleague — including a threat of anal rape and violent assault — has been awarded €7,500 in compensation, reports Breaking News.
Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) Adjudicator Pat Brady concluded that Patrick Kinsella had been exposed to “vile” language by a co-worker.
Mr Brady directed Kinsella’s former employer, R.F.C Security Group, to pay €7,500 after determining that Kinsella had experienced sexual harassment under the Employment Equality Acts due to the nature of the language used, reports Breaking News.
Patrick Kinsella worked with the firm from January 18th, 2024 until he resigned on March 28th, 2025. He was assigned for a time to the Northside Shopping Centre in Dublin, where he reported being subjected to harassment by colleagues in three separate incidents — on October 14th, 2024, in late December 2024, and again in late January 2025.
According to Mr Brady, Kinsella alleged that the first incident on October 14th involved sexually explicit and threatening language, including a threat of anal rape and related violent comments, reports Breaking News.
While the individual accused denied the claims, Mr Brady noted that the allegation of sexual harassment was clearly outlined.
Mr Brady stated: “The language alleged to have been used by the co-worker was vile,” reports Breaking News.
Although the employer conducted an internal investigation into Kinsella’s complaints, Mr Brady noted that the process — which did not conclude until July 2025 for reasons he described as entirely unacceptable — ultimately rejected the allegations, reports Breaking News.
Mr Brady commented: “It was an unusual investigation in that, despite being triggered by the complainant‘s grievance it bizarrely contained almost as many complaints against him as were made by him.”
Regarding the central allegations of harassment, Mr Brady explained: “In respect of the key allegations of sexual harassment both alleged perpetrators denied having made them, although one accepted that the comments about the complainant’s dental related speech problems had been made and this was held by the investigator to have been ‘poorly judged’; a totally inadequate euphemism for what actually transpired,” reports Breaking News.
He added: “In general, the investigation found that the complaints made by the complainant failed for the want of corroboration.”
TheLiberal.ie won’t quit
Please support us with a small donation on PayPal!
However, Mr Brady determined that the comments alleged to have been made on October 14th were “so outrageous it is doubtful that any person would own up to having made them and some weight should have been given to this by the investigator”, reports Breaking News.
Mr Brady concluded that, regarding the October 14th incident, Kinsella had provided detailed and believable sworn testimony about what was said.
Mr Brady said that what was said on October 14th “included a specific threat of serious sexual assault, as part of a generalised tirade against the complainant in respect of his speech problems”.
He noted that although the internal investigation was lengthy and ultimately found no support for the allegations due to a lack of corroboration and denials by those accused, he did not agree with those conclusions, reports Breaking News.
Mr Brady stated: “I reach a different conclusion. I find that the complainant has made out a good prima facie case on the basis of his credible sworn evidence that the alleged perpetrators in his complaint acted in a way which had the effect of violating his right to dignity in the workplace and of sexually harassing him,” reports Breaking News.
Mr Brady also highlighted that the employer did not have the individuals accused of the harassment attend the hearing to provide counter-evidence.
He said that “the burden of proof having passed to it, the respondent has therefore failed to offer evidence to displace that burden”, reports Breaking News.
The company denied any sexual harassment occurred and said it took prompt and appropriate action after receiving Kinsella’s grievance by opening a formal internal inquiry.
The company argued that Kinsella left the job voluntarily and that there was no indication of misconduct or discriminatory treatment by the employer, reports Breaking News.
The employer said that throughout Kinsella’s employment, he was posted to multiple sites, but some assignments were ended at clients’ requests due to concerns about his conduct and work performance.
As a result, Kinsella received a formal written warning on September 9th, 2024, addressing his behaviour on the job and reminding him of company standards, reports Breaking News.
The employer acknowledged that certain remarks by colleagues may have been “poorly judged”, but maintained that there was no supporting evidence for the main allegations of bullying, harassment, or sexually inappropriate language.
The company said the internal investigation uncovered that Kinsella had made racially offensive remarks over the site radio and used threatening language toward other staff, reports Breaking News.
According to the company, these incidents were not disputed by Kinsella and were backed up by credible witness statements.
RFC Security Group insisted that it acted properly at all times, followed fair procedures, and treated Kinsella with dignity and respect throughout the process, reports Breaking News.
Tell us your thoughts in the Facebook post and share this with your friends.
