Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9189 Case Number: LCR13205 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: FREEZER FOODS LIMITED - and - A WORKER |
Claim by a worker that he was unfairly dismissed.
Recommendation:
5. The Court notes that the Company had indicated that it would
not be available to attend the Court hearing.
Having considered the circumstances of the claim the Court
recommends that the claimant be paid a sum of #75.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Brennan Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9189 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13205
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: FREEZER FOODS LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY NEVILLE MURPHY AND COMPANY, SOLICITORS)
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by a worker that he was unfairly dismissed.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker commenced employment with the Company on a trial
basis on 12th September, 1990. He was employed as a general
operative. On 4th October, 1990 his employment with the Company
was terminated. The worker claims that he was unfairly dismissed.
The Company claims that the worker was unsatisfactory and wanted
to leave the job. The worker referred the dispute to the Labour
Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969
agreeing to be bound by the Recommendation of the Court. A Labour
Court hearing took place on 22nd February, 1991. The Company did
not attend and was not represented at the investigation but its
representatives made a written submission to the Court prior to
the hearing.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker was employed by the Company for approximately
three weeks. During that period his work performance was not
criticised and he was given no indication that he might be
found unsatisfactory or unsuitable. He reported for work on
4th October, 1990 as usual and carried out his normal duties.
He did nothing wrong but was verbally abused by his employer
and was told to get out. He did not ask to have his
employment terminated but was unfairly dismissed.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker was employed on a trial basis but was found to
be unsatisfactory. After about three weeks the worker
indicated that he wanted to be "paid off." This was
acceptable to the Company and the worker's employment was
terminated on 4th October, 1990. As far as the Company is
concerned this was the end of the matter.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court notes that the Company had indicated that it would
not be available to attend the Court hearing.
Having considered the circumstances of the claim the Court
recommends that the claimant be paid a sum of #75.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
_______________________
1st March, 1991 Deputy Chairman.
A.S./J.C.