Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87446 Case Number: LCR11362 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: GESTETNER LTD. - and - THOMAS MCEVOY |
Dismissal of a worker.
Recommendation:
4. The Court does not find that this worker's dismissal was
unfair and does not recommend the payment of any compensation.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87446 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11362
Section 20(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11362
Parties: GESTETNER LIMITED
and
A WORKER
Subject:
1. Dismissal of a worker.
Background:
2. The worker commenced employment with the Company on a
temporary basis on 6th May, 1985. His employment was terminated
by the Company with effect from 29th August, 1986, by letter of
21st August, 1986. The termination of employment was unacceptable
to the worker and on 23rd February, 1987 the worker referred the
matter to the Labour Court. On 24th February, 1987 the Company
was invited to attend a conciliation conference, however the
Company declined the invitation. On 2nd June, 1987 the worker
referred the matter to the Labour Court under Section 20(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969 for investigation and
recommendation. The worker agreed to be bound by the Court's
recommendation. The Court investigated the dispute on 14th July,
1987. The Company declined to attend the hearing and informed the
Court accordingly by letter of 26th June, 1987.
Worker's arguments:
3. (i) The reasons given by the Company for the termination of
employment were: the worker's employment was always
temporary; the worker was the least satisfactory
employee; he failed to obtain a driving licence; and he
was not sufficiently committed to the Company. These
are neither relevant nor appropriate reasons.
(ii) The worker was given four separate letters during his
time with the Company extending the periods of
temporary employment, the last one of which extended it
to 30th April, 1986 (details supplied to the Court).
The period of time from 30th April, 1986 to the
termination of employment was four months and at that
stage the worker considered the employment to be of an
indefinite period and not temporary as no such
stipulation had been made by the Company.
(iii) No complaints were ever made to the worker about his
work. If he was unsuitable for any reason the Company
would not have re-employed him and continuously
extended the periods of temporary employment.
(iv) The Company asked the worker to secure a driving
licence which he endeavoured to do. It was not
stipulated as a condition of his continued employment.
(v) The worker was unfairly dismissed and should receive
compensation of #1,000.
RECOMMENDATION:
4. The Court does not find that this worker's dismissal was
unfair and does not recommend the payment of any compensation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M Horgan
11th August, 1987 --------------
U.M./U.S. Chairman