Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9074 Case Number: LCR12833 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: PHOENIX SERVICE STATION - and - A WORKER |
Claim by the worker that he was unfairly dismissed.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having regard to the circumstances in this case
recommends that in addition to the holiday pay due to him he be
paid one weeks wages in lieu of notice.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Brennan Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9074 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12833
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: PHOENIX SERVICE STATION
(NINRAL LIMITED)
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the worker that he was unfairly dismissed.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned was employed at the self service garage
for four months. He worked the evening shift 4 - 9.30 p.m.
Monday, Wednesday, Friday, Sunday and Saturday from 7.30 a.m. -
4.00 p.m. His duties involved the operation of the pumps from a
console and the receipt of cash, credit cards and cheques for the
sale of petrol, diesel, oils. The garage also sold cigarettes,
sweets etc and was reasonably busy. The worker's take home pay
was #70 per week. He was dismissed by his Employer because of
discrepancies with regard to credit card accounts, and the cashing
of cheques. The worker claimed his dismissal was unfair and
referred the dispute to the Labour Court under Section 20(1) of
the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the
Court's recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the 21st
February, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The garage is quite a busy one with separate accounting
sheets for petrol cash sales and items such as oils,
cigarettes, sweets, and car wash. There are also separate
sheets for credit sales cheques and credit cards. There are
twenty credit accounts. At times the worker had to operate
extremely quickly and often received abuse from customers
because of faulty pumps that overflowed. He made a few minor
mistakes on the credit accounts by omitting to include car
registration numbers on receipts. The worker feels however
that these mistakes did not warrant his arbitrary dismissal
which occurred without any prior notice when he reported for
duty on a Friday evening.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker concerned did not adopt the proper procedures
with regard to cheques and credit cards. He was aware that
cheques and credit cards could not be accepted if they were
for larger amounts than the purchase. He was also aware that
the registration of the vehicle should have been written on
the back of each cheque/credit card as this is invaluable in
the event of stolen cheques/cards. These instructions were
not carried out by the worker. Complaints were received from
credit account holders about registration numbers not being
put on each sheet. The worker was warned about this
procedure. Nevertheless the discrepancies continued and the
Employer had no option but to dismiss the worker. It is
significant to note that since his departure there are no
longer discrepancies in these accounts.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having regard to the circumstances in this case
recommends that in addition to the holiday pay due to him he be
paid one weeks wages in lieu of notice.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
_________________________
John O'Connell
10th May, 1990. Deputy Chairman
T.O.'D/J.C.