Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9138 Case Number: AD9116 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: SEMPERIT (IRELAND) LIMITED - and - A WORKER |
Appeal by the worker of Rights Commissioner's recommendation No. B.C. 136/90, concerning his alleged unfair dismissal.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Court does
not find grounds to alter the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation.
The Court so decides.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Brennan Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9138 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD1691
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 13(9)
PARTIES: SEMPERIT (IRELAND) LIMITED
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the worker of Rights Commissioner's recommendation
No. B.C. 136/90, concerning his alleged unfair dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned commenced employment with the Company on
8th January, 1990, as a general operative on a six months
probationary basis. The Company contended that following two
periods of normal training his output and quality levels were
consistently below the normal Company standards. At a meeting on
1st June, 1990, in the presence of his Union Branch Secretary and
local Shop Stewards, the worker concerned voluntarily tendered his
resignation which was accepted by the Company. The worker's Union
representatives then negotiated a sum of money which would be
given to the worker. The worker concerned alleges that he was
persecuted by management during his probationary period. He
believes that this was because his father had previously worked
there and his father had had difficulties with the Company. The
worker also alleges that the sum he received from the Company
(#1,400) was owed to him anyway, as it represented back pay,
holidays and bonus earnings. The worker felt that he had been
unfairly dismissed and referred the matter to a Rights
Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On 13th
December, 1990, the Rights Commissioner issued the following
findings and recommendation.
"Findings
Having investigated the matter and having given full and
careful consideration to the points made by both parties I
have come to the following conclusions:
1. I am satisfied that the worker resigned from his
employment quite freely and after consultation with his
trade union.
2. Therefore the question of dismissal just does not
arise.
RECOMMENDATION
In the light of the above I recommend that the claim by
the worker must fail".
(The worker was named in the Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation).
The Rights Commissioner's recommendation was rejected by the
worker who appealed it on 2nd January, 1991 to the Labour Court
under Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The
Court heard the appeal on 14th February, 1991.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker concerned was never late or absent during his
time with the Company. At no stage was he impudent to anyone
and yet the Company seemed to want to get rid of him. On one
occasion a manager stood behind him for half an hour whilst he
tried to work. No-one can be expected to work under those
circumstances.
2. The Company offered him #1,400 to leave. He was told
that if he did not leave he would be sacked and that the
Department of Social Welfare would be informed. The worker
was terrified and agreed to resign.
3. The #1,400 paid by the Company was in fact monies
already earned by the worker concerned. The worker believes
that he was unfairly dismissed and appeals to the Court to
recommend that he be re-instated.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. At the end of the worker's induction training he was
allocated to Stage 1 Tyre building. The training period for
this job is 240 hours. At the end of his training period both
his quality and productivity levels were not up to standard.
Following a second training period his performance was
reviewed and discussed with him. He was informed that he
would have to improve his performance.
2. On 29th May, 1990, the worker was given a quality test
consisting of 20 questions plus the building of 20 carcasses
with no time limit. He passed the test with 100% knowledge
and 95% practical. The day after the test he built 56
defective carcasses. In total he underwent 580 hours
training.
3. On 1st June, 1990, in the presence of his Union Branch
Official and Shop Stewards, he voluntarily offered his
resignation. This was accepted by the Company who then
negotiated a sum of money to be given to him.
DECISION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Court does
not find grounds to alter the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
11th March, 1991 -------------
B O'N/U.S. p.p. Kevin Heffernan
Chairman