A senior partner at Deloitte has strongly denied allegations about “toxic masculinity” in its work culture – and says he has been “completely and utterly misquoted” on a remark to a woman subordinate who claims she was forced out of the firm.
Brian Jackson, Deloitte’s head of audit in the financial services sector, has been giving evidence to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) in a constructive dismissal complaint by Viviana Jakomin, who quit her job of four years in late 2023.
Jakomin said she was left “sick, anxious and desperate” at the end of four years at the company. Her lawyers say she was subject to “gaslighting” about advancement in the firm to the point she suffered “an injury to her mental health”.
Jackson said in evidence this week that Jakomin joined the firm as a temporary personal assistant at a point when he was investigating how to cut down on admin work on audits for its client-facing staff.
His “vision” was to build a team of project management staff who would give support to professional teams working on big audits, he said.
He knew Jakomin was experienced in project management, the tribunal heard. He said he got approval to create a role for her as “financial services audit project co-ordinator” when her temp contract expired.
Her core tasks were “administrative in nature”, he said. “It’s assisting, monitoring and stuff like that. Clearly, they’re open enough – people can stretch beyond that if they’re performing well,” he said.
He said in discussions with Jakomin, he said it would mean “an opportunity for future promotion opportunities”.
“Was there a promise made that she would be appointed into a management group level role as project manager?” Harry Wall of business group Ibec, for the employer, asked him.
“At no point whatsoever was there any promise to Viviana that she would be promoted into the management group. That was not even a discussion,” he said.
His intention was to see how the project played out over a full year of annual audit cycles – in particular the big audit season in March 2020. He said he was surprised when Jakomin expressed interest in another job elsewhere in the firm in December 2019. “I felt we were on this year one, let’s make an impact, make this a success,” he said.
The fact she was “looking elsewhere” suggested “some level of dissatisfaction”, he said. “I did not understand that Viviana had a significant concern that she was not part of the management group,” he said.
This did not become an issue until February 2020, when Jakomin approached him outside a set of glass booths adjoining the open office where they worked, Jackson said.
“From the moment she went in [to a booth], she just shouted at me, and she wouldn’t let me speak at all,” he said.
“Promote me. Promote me now,” he quoted Jakomin as saying.
“I was trying to find my way in: ‘Viviana, we need to talk about this,’” he said.
“No. Promote me now. Promote me now. Promote me now,” came the response, Jackson said.
He replied: “Even if I wanted to, I couldn’t promote you now,” and added that he was “happy to support her” to go for more senior posts, he said.
“Viviana kept shouting over me: ‘No, no, no, no, promote me now,’” the partner said. “She was rude, she was emotional, and actually it was a really, really unpleasant conversation. Every single thing I tried to say got shouted over … I couldn’t get a word in,” he said.
Jackson said he had been “completely and utterly misquoted in so many places about what he said next”.
“I said: ‘Viviana, if you are unwilling to listen to a single word I am going to say, you will never be promoted,’” Jackson told the tribunal. He then left, he said.
“The quote against me is: ‘If you come up against me, you will never be promoted,’” Jackson added.
“This meeting was a really, really unpleasant meeting, and after this meeting there was never anything other than pleasant, kind, constructive interaction between Viviana and myself,” he said. “[It was] the only meeting in a five-year history that was anything other than positive, constructive and kind,” he said.
Cross-examining Jackson on Wednesday, counsel for the complainant Eoin Morris, appearing instructed by Crushell & Co Solicitors, said Deloitte was “telling Viviana one thing, creating a reality for her that is completely different from reality as you know it to be”.
That reality was that there was “no intention of supporting her for management”, Morris said.
“I was 100 per cent supportive of Viviana, so motivated to create the opportunity to be promoted. To suggest there was any gaslighting there is completely wrong,” Jackson said.
Jackson had been asked to engage with a formal workplace grievance process on foot of a complaint by Jakomin at one stage, the tribunal heard.
The witness said earlier testimony to the WRC using “terms like ‘bullying’” to describe the workplace environment were “completely untrue”.
Jakomin concluded her evidence to the tribunal earlier this week, having spoken about the February 2020 meeting at an earlier point in the proceedings. Her barrister is to cross-examine Jackson on his evidence when the matter resumes later this year.
The tribunal heard on Tuesday that Jakomin later pursued a workplace grievance and received an outcome, but resigned while out sick before an appeal process was concluded.
Her case is that she was being pressured to return to an “unsafe workplace” when she was contacted by human resources about returning from sick leave.
An occupational health assessment in the third quarter of 2023 determined that Jakomin’s mental health was “somewhat strained” but that she was fit to go back to work if her concerns could be addressed.
Jakomin took issue with that assessment, and said that when she spoke to the assessor from Medmark, she was “distressed” and “constantly crying over the phone”.
Adjudicator Penelope McGrath noted that the sick notes provided by Jakomin’s doctor did not refer to workplace stress, but Morris said they used “boilerplate” language referring to a medical issue.
“I was sick at this stage, sick, anxious and desperate, begging Deloitte … in terms of safety, security in the workplace, there was never an assurance,” she said.
“They were really good in writing … but the reality is completely different,” she said.
“The bubble had to burst at some stage,” Morris submitted.
The case has now been adjourned pending the scheduling of four more hearing days in September, when Jackson’s cross-examination will continue.
Harry Wall of Ibec, for the employer, said he had five more company witnesses to call.