Dublin's Hairy Lemon pub ordered to pay €30k to former barman dismissed due to his age

ONE OF DUBLIN’S best-known pubs has been ordered to pay €30,000 in compensation to a former employee who was fired because of his age.

The Workplace Relations Commission ruled the Hairy Lemon pub on Stephen Street Lower in Dublin has discriminated against former maintenance operative, John Mooney, on grounds of age.

Mooney (71) claimed he was informed in November 2023 that he was being dismissed at Christmas because the pub’s insurance had increased because of his age.

He had worked as a barman in the Hairy Lemon for over 20 years before being made redundant and then rehired in 2014 as a maintenance operative.

Mooney told the WRC that he was informed there was a stipulation in his contract of employment that he had to retire at 65 and he had already worked far beyond that.

He claimed the pub’s owner, Peter Hanahoe, came to him on the day of his dismissal in January 2024 and handed him an envelope saying “sorry about that John” before walking away.

Mooney said the letter was formal confirmation of his dismissal and he left the premises after the bar manager asked him for his keys to the pub.

The pub had denied that it was in breach of the Employment Equality Act over its dismissal of the complainant.

Its legal representative told the WRC that Mooney was informed in November 2023 that his position was being made redundant.

However, the Hairy Lemon acknowledged that he did not receive any redundancy payment.

The pub claimed its insurance premium had gone up considerably over the previous year and it would have additional insurance cost issues due to the retention of someone of Mooney’s age for a position in maintenance.

The WRC heard that the company’s directors were also worried about some of the physical aspects of his role and believed that “an accident was waiting to happen.”

In his ruling, WRC adjudication officer, Breiffni O’Neill, noted that the Hairy Lemon claimed Mooney had been dismissed on the grounds of redundancy rather than his age.

However, O’Neill said this contradicted the evidence of the complainant who testified that he was told he was being let go because of his age.

The WRC official said he preferred the evidence of O’Neill on the basis that both sides accepted he had not received a redundancy payment.

He said the Hairy Lemon had failed to provide any written documentation or correspondence from their insurer to support the pub’s assertion that there were cost issues about retaining Mooney in employment because of his age.

The WRC ruled that the pub had discriminated against the complainant on grounds of his age and ordered it to pay €30,000 to its former employee.

In fixing the amount of compensation, O’Neill said it must be “effective, dissuasive and proportionate” while also acknowledging that it was unlikely Mooney will find work again because of his age.