A salesman who said an industry “rumour mill” made him “damaged goods” after he was unfairly dismissed by an international medical devices firm has won nearly €40,000.
The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has directed Ambu Ltd to pay redress to worker Kevin Joyce after it admitted in May that his dismissal in July 2025 was unfair.
Mr Joyce, who said he was earning over €160,000 at Ambu, spent over 10 months out of work after what he called his “unceremonious dismissal” as territory manager for its urology and ear, nose and throat products in Ireland.
He told the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) in May that his ex-employer set an industry “rumour mill” turning against him with an email to staff announcing it had decided to “part ways” with him.
Mr Joyce’s lawyers said that their client filed a grievance about a “disparity” in performance-related pay to sales staff, with an €18,000 bonus at issue.
An external investigator concluded the matter “needed addressing”, Mr Joyce said.
He then found himself subject to a “no-fault” dismissal, he said.
An email to staff announcing Mr Joyce’s departure read: “Dear all, today we have decided to part ways with Kevin Joyce with immediate effect,” the tribunal heard.
“The medical device industry is a small industry – everyone knows everyone, and word got out very quickly,” Mr Joyce said.
There were rumours that he had “done something gravely wrong” amounting to “serious misconduct”, he said.
He contrasted the email with one sent referring to one of his former colleagues leaving the country, which highlighted her achievements in the job and wished her well for the future.
Mr Joyce said he had to be “transparent” with one hiring manager when the man asked him “Why are you leaving Ambu, given your track record and all the awards?”
“I let him know what happened and that I was completely unfairly dismissed through a no-fault termination on 2 July [2025]”.
After that, there was a change in tone and his job application went no further.
“I was completely damaged goods, and not an attractive employee for anyone to deal with,” he added. “I was doing my own credibility, my own reputation, my own character, damage by putting my CV out there and having these conversations,” Mr Joyce said.
Under cross-examination, Mr Joyce set out that in the 10 months since his dismissal, he had documented 63 instances where he had inquired about new work, including 23 formal job applications.
Rosemary Mallon BL, for the firm, told the hearing: “I confirm, for the avoidance of all doubt, there was no fault on the part of Mr Joyce.”
In her decision on the case, published today, adjudicator Úna Glazier-Farmer awarded Mr Joyce €39,858.13 for his losses arising from unfair dismissal.
She found Mr Joyce was entitled to redress for the loss of his base salary and employer pension contribution for a period of 33 weeks’ unemployment, but nothing in respect of any bonuses.
She excluded the first three months’ unemployment as Mr Joyce had been paid three months’ salary in lieu of notice.
Ms Glazier-Farmer also decided not to direct the company to pay redress to Mr Joyce for any losses incurred after the date the case was heard.
This was because she concluded the complainant’s efforts to find new work after his unfair dismissal were “limited in scope and consistency” and that he had “engaged only to a limited extent with alternative opportunities”.
“However, it is also accepted that the respondent’s conduct, including the manner of dismissal and the operation of the restrictive covenant, had an adverse impact on the [Mr Joyce’s] ability to secure employment,” the adjudicator wrote.
Counsel for the complainant, David Byrnes BL, was instructed by Nikita Kelly of Lavelle Partners LLP; Ms Mallon by Mason, Hayes and Curran LLP.
