A COMPANY THAT organises medieval banquets in a 15th-century castle has been ordered to implement strict temperature controls at the venue following claims that staff in velvet costumes were fainting from heat.
It follows a complaint by an entertainer at the banquets, who alleged that the firm had breached health and safety legislation by failing to provide a safe working environment for performers and staff.
He told an adjudication hearing of the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) that the venue became “unbearably hot” during the summer months as heat was retained by the thick stone walls of the castle.
The banquets are attended by up to 158 guests, who are served a four-course meal on heated plates, and temperatures were consistently up to five degrees warmer than the outside air.
Performance staff were required to wear thick, heavy velvet medieval costumes, allegedly resulting in numerous complaints from customers and several incidents in which staff and guests had fainted.
The entertainer told the WRC that a sister location enjoyed full air conditioning, but this 15th-century castle had no proper ventilation whatsoever, placing an “intolerable burden” on the workforce.
He argued that the company had failed to provide a safe working environment under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 and its accompanying 2007 regulations. He sought a recommendation compelling the company to install wall-mounted air conditioning units.
The company, which is a subsidiary of a local authority, rejected the claim that it had ignored the problem, stating that it took the worker’s concerns seriously and had deployed a series of mobile air conditioning units.
However, the entertainer said these were noisy, emitted a foul smell, took up performance space and blocked the view of paying guests, prompting staff to regularly wheel them out of the room when people arrived.
The company further argued that because the venue is a protected historic structure, any permanent structural modifications or wall-mounted units would require extensive conservation architectural surveys and formal planning approval.
It noted that a full risk assessment had been commissioned in January 2026 and that it had introduced mitigations including staff water stations, a transition to LED candles, and alterations to female entertainer costumes.
It also claimed that no fainting incidents had been officially logged in its incident book.
In her decision, WRC adjudication officer Ewa Sobanska noted that there was a clear obligation on an employer to ensure a safe and suitable working environment.
However, she said the protected status of the building placed legitimate legal and structural constraints on the company. The WRC did not possess the technical expertise or the authority to compel it to undertake specific structural building works.
While the employer had taken steps to address the issue, it had yet to implement a sufficiently effective or sustainable long-term solution, said Sobanska.
She issued a series of directives to the company, stipulating that existing portable air conditioning units must be made fully operational and consistently utilised based on health and safety priorities rather than aesthetic concerns.
She also ordered the immediate introduction of digital temperature monitoring loggers, with strictly defined thresholds that will trigger immediate interventions when exceeded.
Furthermore, the company was ordered to develop a formal heat-related risk management procedure, review staff rotation and scheduled breaks to reduce heat exposure, and actively progress its medium and long-term permanent structural cooling solutions alongside conservation architects.