Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: Obligations, Consequences and Preventative Steps

Sexual harassment remains a significant workplace issue. As the legal landscape continues to evolve and claims before the Workplace Relations Commission (‘WRC’) continue to grow, so too do employers’ legal and reputational exposure. This article outlines employers’ obligations under Irish law, the potential consequences of non-compliance, and the practical steps organisations should take to prevent and address sexual harassment in the workplace.

What Is Sexual Harassment Under Irish Law?

Sexual harassment is defined under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 – 2024 (the ‘EEAs’) as any form of unwanted verbal, non-verbal, or physical conduct of a sexual nature that has the purpose or effect of violating a person’s dignity and creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment. The definition is deliberately broad and captures a wide range of behaviour, including unwanted touching, sexual comments or jokes, explicit material, inappropriate messages, and unwelcome romantic advances. Importantly, a single incident can be sufficient to constitute sexual harassment under the EEAs.

The Legal Framework

Several legal instruments govern sexual harassment in Irish workplaces placing substantial obligations on employers.

Sexual harassment can occur in person, online, at work-related social events or while working remotely. It is prohibited under the EEAs as a form of discrimination on the gender ground, and can be perpetrated by employees, agency workers, clients, customers, contractors and other third parties. Under the EEAs, an employer may be held liable for acts of sexual harassment committed by its employees, and potentially by third parties, unless the employer can demonstrate that it took reasonably practicable steps to prevent the conduct and, where it occurred, to address its effects.

A second instrument of considerable practical importance is the WRC’s Code of Practice on Sexual Harassment and Harassment at Work (the ‘Code’)¹. While not legally binding in the same way as statute, it is admissible as evidence before the WRC and the Labour Court and is frequently relied upon when assessing whether an employer took adequate steps to prevent and address harassment. The Code sets out a detailed benchmark for what effective employer compliance looks like in practice.

The Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 also requires employers to identify and manage workplace risks to employees’ safety, health and welfare. In practice, this includes considering the risk of harassment and sexual harassment as part of workplace risk assessments and safety management measures.

What Happens if an Employer Falls Short of Its Obligations?

An employer that is found to fall short can face serious consequences. For a finding of sexual harassment, the WRC may award compensation of up to two years’ remuneration and can order the employer to take a specific course of action. If a claim of discriminatory dismissal is upheld, the WRC can award the same level of compensation, and potentially reinstatement or reengagement. The WRC’s Annual Report for 2025 (published April 2026)² recorded a 44% increase in complaint applications in a single year, with gender remaining consistently among the top three equality grounds. As the WRC’s Director General has noted, the Commission’s role in resolving discrimination complaints “has never been more relevant.”

The Law in Practice: Lessons from the Tribunals

WRC and Labour Court decisions illustrate what these obligations mean in practice and demonstrate the cost to employers who fall short.

In A Hotel v A Worker³, an early and frequently cited Labour Court determination, the Court held that an employer’s statutory defence to a harassment claim is “preventative in nature”. In other words, an employer cannot rely only on steps taken after harassment has occurred; it must show that reasonable preventative measures were already in place. That principle had a real financial consequence in A Store v A Worker⁴, where the employer’s sexual harassment policy was available only in English despite a workforce for whom English was not a first language, and had not been reinforced through manager training. The Labour Court found that the statutory defence was unavailable and awarded the employee €15,000 in compensation for the effects of the discrimination. More recently, in Catherine Kelly v An Post⁵, an untrained manager investigated a sexual harassment complaint alone, without referring the matter to HR and without following the safeguards in the Code. Due to severe procedural failures and the impact of the discrimination on the Complainant, the WRC awarded the statutory maximum of two years’ remuneration. In addition, the employer was ordered to provide comprehensive Dignity at Work and Anti-Bullying training for all supervisory and management staff.

Each case will depend on its facts, and employers have been able to successfully defend a claim based on the procedure followed. In Katarzyna (Kasia) Czernik v RTÉ⁶, the WRC found that sexual harassment had occurred but accepted that the employer had done enough to rely on the statutory defence: it had a comprehensive policy in place which had been communicated to all employees; provided management training to enable a swift response to the initial complaint; provided support through the employer’s Employee Assistance Programme; appointed an independent investigative board within days; and supported the Complainant through the employer’s sick leave policy. Taken together, these decisions confirm a consistent theme: a written policy is only the starting point of compliance.

Key Employer Responsibilities

• Have a written policy in place. Employers should have a clear, up-to-date anti-harassment and dignity at work policy that explains what constitutes sexual harassment, sets out informal and formal complaint procedures, identifies the steps to be taken once a complaint is received, and addresses confidentiality protections. The Code sets the detailed standard.
• Communicate the policy and train staff. A policy that is not communicated will not be sufficient. All staff and managers must be trained on it, records of training must be kept, and managers in particular must know how to respond when a concern is raised.
• Respond promptly and effectively to complaints. Investigations must be conducted promptly, fairly, and confidentially. Complainants must be protected from retaliation throughout. Delays and inadequate investigations are frequently cited in WRC decisions as evidence of employer failure.
• Protect employees from third-party harassment. Employers must proactively assess and address the risk of harassment by customers, clients, and contractors and must act on any complaint without unnecessary delay.

The clearest lesson from the legislation, the Code and the case law is that prevention is critical. Employers that invest in effective policies, training and complaint-handling procedures are significantly better placed to protect their employees and to defend claims should they arise.

If you have any queries about your obligations as an employer, please contact your usual Littler contact.