Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88831 Case Number: LCR12210 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: PARKWALL TAVERNS LIMITED - and - A WORKER |
Claim by the worker that he was unfairly dismissed.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, is of the view that the claimant was not unfairly
dismissed and accordingly does not recommend any further action.
The Court notes the Company's undertaking to pay him all statutory
entitlements due and to furnish him with a reference.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88831 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12210
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: PARKWALL TAVERNS LIMITED
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the worker that he was unfairly dismissed.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker was employed by Parkwell Taverns Limited in April,
1988 as a senior assistant barperson. As such he was entrusted
from time to time with the responsibility of the key to the
Company's cash feeder room for the bar's cash registers. On one
such occasion, when a sum of #100 went missing, the worker offered
to repay the Company as it had been under his sole control. There
followed a number of instances when smaller amounts went missing.
However, on 16th September, 1988 an amount of #100 in cash went
missing. The Company investigated the disappearance and decided
to dismiss the worker. He was informed on 18th September, 1988
when he reported for duty that his services were no longer
required. The worker referred the case to the Labour Court under
Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and undertook
to be bound by the recommendation of the Court. A Court
investigation into the dispute was held on 12th December, 1988.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker was told on reporting for work on 18th
September, 1988 that his services were no longer required. He
was not given any reason for his dismissal nor was he given a
reference or payment in lieu of notice. The worker has been
unemployed since that date.
2. The worker paid back some missing money because he had
been in charge when it went missing and felt responsible for
it. Lesser sums of money went missing when others had access
to the cash and the worker did not offer to repay such sums.
3. In relation to the night of 16th September, the tills
were correct at 6.30 p.m. and the Company says the money was
missing at 7.00p.m. The worker was not the only one on it
that time. When the loss was discovered the tills were
checked but management would not go through the cash in the
safe. The worker was off the next day but it was suggested
that the barmen talk about the incident and that was the
worker's reason for coming in that day. The other two barmen
had no objection to making good the loss.
4. The worker was not employed in "Scruffy Murphys" an
alleged by the Company. He did however work for its owner on
one occasion on outdoor catering.
5. There was no question of drinking on the premises
without paying for it. The till was checked on that occasion
and the drink found to be receipted. Also, the incident
referred to by the Company of the six-pack was explained to a
member of the family.
6. The worker was not aware that he was on twelve months
probation. There was no written contract between the parties.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Any employment relationship must be based on mutual
trust between employee and employer. It is of particular
importance in a position where the employee is to have a
significant responsibility for cash. The worker on many
occasions flaunted the limits of the trust relationship
between himself and his employer and his behaviour over the
period of his employment gave rise to the clear assessment
that he was acting irresponsibly in a position that carried
with it great responsibility for the Company's cash.
2. The worker's employment was terminated in accordance
with the terms under which he was employed by the Company. He
was dismissed during his trial/probationary period on the
grounds that he had been deemed unsuitable by the Company for
continued employment.
3. When the worker originally applied for employment his
curriculum vitae omitted any reference to a period of
employment with "Scruffy Murphys" public house. This was a
blatant attempt by the worker to mislead his then prospective
employer by giving a false account of his employment history.
On discovering this omission the Company felt that its
position of trust with the worker had been tarnished.
4. There were a number of incidents involving the worker
removing drink from the premises without payment and remaining
on the premises after hours for the consumption of drink.
5. When #100 went missing the worker repaid it "out of a
sense of responsibility". On a number of occasions when
lesser amounts of money went missing the worker again
volunteered to repay the amount involved. This tended to
happen even in instances where other members of staff had
access to the cash. Immediately prior to the termination of
the worker's employment an amount of #100 went missing. When
the barmen were informed of this the worker stated the amount
would have to be repaid. However, the other two barmen
objected to having to repay money they had not taken. The
Company narrowed down the time of the theft to between 2.30
p.m. and 7.00 p.m. during which period the worker concerned
was on his own behind the bar between 3.30 p.m. and 5.00 p.m.
because of staff rostering arrangements.
6. The Company is prepared to pay any statutory
entitlements due to the worker and to give him a reference.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, is of the view that the claimant was not unfairly
dismissed and accordingly does not recommend any further action.
The Court notes the Company's undertaking to pay him all statutory
entitlements due and to furnish him with a reference.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
13th January, 1989 ----------------------
R.B./U.S. Deputy Chairman