Avoca Ex-Manager Wins Unfair Dismissal Case After Workplace Outburst

Dublin, Ireland – February 21, 2026 – A former senior manager at Irish retailer Avoca has been awarded compensation following a ruling by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) that his dismissal was unfair, despite acknowledging his abusive conduct contributed to the termination of his employment. The case highlights the complexities of balancing workplace misconduct with procedural fairness in disciplinary actions.

Colin Egan, who worked as a senior team lead for over three years, was dismissed for gross misconduct after an incident at the Avoca store in Ballsbridge, Dublin, in November 2023. The incident began after Egan vomited on the store floor during a stocktake, escalating into a verbal outburst directed at colleagues.

Evidence presented to the WRC detailed a volatile scene. Ivan Judha, a food hall manager, testified that Egan became “agitated” and began “shouting and screaming” at the store’s general manager, using highly offensive language, including terms directed at her and other staff. Witnesses reported Egan aggressively approached the front door, demanding to be let out, and entered the general manager’s office, blocking the doorway while continuing his verbal abuse.

The general manager testified that Egan called her a “f***ing c**t” and described other managers as a “joke” and “r****ds”, stating she felt “cornered and uncomfortable” and feared he would damage the glass door during his outburst. After being asked to leave, Egan refused, expressing concern that his colleagues would mishandle the stocktake in his absence.

Following the incident, Avoca initiated an investigation and interviewed Egan, and witnesses. He was presented with allegations of serious insubordination, disruptive behaviour, and abusive language. Initially, Egan denied directing the abusive language at anyone specifically, attributing his behaviour to feeling unwell. However, company witnesses disputed this account.

The WRC adjudication officer, Elizabeth Spelman, ruled that while Egan’s conduct contributed to his dismissal, the procedure leading to that dismissal was flawed. Specifically, Spelman noted a failure to provide Egan with minutes of witness investigation meetings in a timely manner as a “particular concern.” There was also disagreement regarding the definition of “insubordination” within the disciplinary process.

As a result of these procedural flaws, Spelman concluded that Avoca Handweavers Shops Limited had failed to afford Egan fair procedure, rendering the dismissal unfair. Egan had argued that mitigating factors were ignored and that his prior record was unblemished. While initially denying using specific abusive terms, he later admitted to using the word “c**t” “once or twice, tops,” claiming he was referring to someone not present, and acknowledged using the word “b***hes” and potentially referring to the situation as “r****ded.”

The WRC awarded Egan €2,760 in compensation. The ruling underscores the importance of adhering to fair and transparent procedures, even in cases involving serious misconduct. While employers are within their rights to dismiss employees for gross misconduct, they must demonstrate that the process followed was just and reasonable.

This case follows a similar ruling in December 2025, where an executive was awarded €180,000 for unfair dismissal after being terminated via video call. These decisions highlight a growing trend of scrutiny regarding employer conduct during disciplinary proceedings and the potential financial consequences of procedural errors.

The Avoca case serves as a cautionary tale for employers across all sectors. It demonstrates that even when an employee’s behaviour warrants disciplinary action, a failure to follow due process can lead to costly legal challenges and reputational damage. Companies must ensure that disciplinary procedures are clearly defined, consistently applied, and that employees are given a fair opportunity to respond to allegations and present mitigating circumstances.