Complainant: Syed Baqur Hussein
Respondent: One Complete Solution Limited (OCS)
WRC Decision: No discrimination found
Date of Incident: August 2022
Decision Date: August 2025
Legislation: Employment Equality Act 1998
Adjudication Officer: Máire Mulcahy

Background

Syed Baqur Hussein, an Indian national and Contract Manager with OCS, brought a discrimination and harassment complaint on grounds of race to the WRC after being demoted and issued a final written warning following a violent altercation with a shoplifter at the Jervis Street Tesco in Dublin.

Mr Hussein was involved in a serious incident where he punched a shoplifter who had subjected him to racial abuse and physical assault. He argued that racial bias influenced the company’s decision to sanction him more harshly than a white European colleague, who was also present but not disciplined.

The Incident

• The shoplifter and his wife were aggressive and abusive, including racial slurs such as “Paki paedo bastard”.
  
• Mr Hussein and another security guard were assaulted, with Mr Hussein receiving serious facial injuries.
  
• Mr Hussein punched the shoplifter during the scuffle, while other guards attempted to restrain him using open-hand techniques.
  
• Upon returning from leave, he was suspended, subjected to a disciplinary process, and demoted with a final warning.
  

Claims by the Complainant

Mr Hussein claimed:

• He was discriminated against based on his race/nationality.
  
• A white comparator received no disciplinary action.
  
• There was a “culture of racism” in the company.
  
• The decision failed to consider the provocation and severity of the assault he experienced.

Employer’s Response (OCS)

OCS argued:

• Mr Hussein’s actions amounted to gross misconduct, as he punched the shoplifter first, before being physically assaulted himself.
  
• His conduct breached company use-of-force and de-escalation protocols.
  
• The white colleague used open-hand restraint and followed procedures.
  
• Disciplinary history showed both Irish and non-Irish employees had previously received demotions and final warnings.
  
• The sanctions were based on behaviour, not ethnicity.

WRC Findings

• The WRC acknowledged flaws in the disciplinary process, including lack of meeting notes and failure to consider mitigating circumstances such as provocation.
  
• However, these procedural failings did not meet the threshold for discrimination under equality law.
  
• Mr Hussein’s comparator behaved differently (used de-escalation vs. physical strike).
  
• The employer rebutted the inference of racial discrimination, supported by evidence of consistent sanctioning across nationalities.

“Employers may act unfairly, but this is not necessarily discrimination.”
– Adjudicator Máire Mulcahy

• A separate racial harassment complaint was ruled out of time.

Recommendations from WRC

• OCS should revise its Bullying and Harassment at Work Policy.
  
• Display anti-racism and dignity at work posters across worksites to reinforce that all staff are entitled to a workplace free from harassment.

Key Learnings for Employers (Bloom Consultancy)

Procedural Fairness Still Matters
Even when misconduct is found, disciplinary actions must be accompanied by clear documentation, recorded meetings, and consideration of context.

Use-of-Force Policies Must Be Clear
Security staff need robust, legally compliant training in de-escalation vs. justified defence, especially in public-facing retail environments.

Distinguish Unfairness from Discrimination
Not every unfair action equates to unlawful discrimination. Employers can defend decisions with comparative evidence and a consistent disciplinary record.

Proactively Promote Anti-Racism
Employers should visibly commit to equality and dignity at work, especially in high-risk sectors like security, by:

• Providing anti-racism training
  
• Displaying reminder posters
  
• Ensuring clear, accessible complaint mechanisms

Bloom Consultancy Commentary

This case underscores the need for clear protocols, fair investigation procedures, and bias-awareness in disciplinary decisions, especially in high-pressure industries like security. It also highlights the limits of the WRC’s jurisdiction where timeframes are missed or where claims do not meet legal thresholds.

This article is based on public decisions of the Workplace Relations Commission and reported case summaries from Irish media sources. It is intended as a commentary on HR compliance issues relevant to employers and HR professionals in Ireland.