Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92276 Case Number: AD92187 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: CENTRA SUPERMARKET LIMITED DONNYBROOK - and - IRISH NATIONAL UNION OF VINTNERS' GROCERS & ALLIED TRADES';ASSISTANTS |
Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. BC18/92 concerning the alleged constructive dismissal of a worker.
Recommendation:
8. Having considered the submission from the parties the Court
is satisfied that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
reasonable and should be upheld. The Court accordingly rejects
the appeal and so decides.
The Court notes that the respresentative of the Company indicated
at the hearing that any money deducted from wages would be
refunded. The Court expects that this will be done.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92276 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD18792
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: CENTRA SUPERMARKET LIMITED DONNYBROOK
AND
IRISH NATIONAL UNION OF VINTNERS' GROCERS & ALLIED TRADES'
ASSISTANTS
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation No. BC18/92 concerning the alleged constructive
dismissal of a worker.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker was employed as a full-time cashier by the Company
from March, 1991. She was employed on a 40 hour week Monday to
Friday. Her hours were 2.00p.m. to 10.00p.m. and she was in
receipt of #112 per week.
3. The present owner acquired the shop as a going concern in
October, 1991 and retained the existing staff on their previous
rates of pay and conditions of employment.
4. The worker resigned from the Company on 13th December, 1991
and referred a claim for constructive dismissal to a Rights
Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. The Rights
Commissioner investigated the dispute on 11th March, 1992. The
Company did not attend or was not represented at the hearing. The
Rights Commissioner issued the following findings and
recommendation on 25th March, 1992:
"Having investigated the matter and having given the most
careful consideration to the points made by the claimant I
have come to the following conclusions.
1. I believe that the claimant has been subjected to
systematic harassment by the manageress of the supermarket.
2. I am convinced that this harassment has on occasions
taken a most cruel form given that it was known to the
manageress that the worker had recently been diagnosed as
suffering from multiple sclerosis.
3. Indicative of this unacceptable approach by the agents
of the employer it can be cited as an example of the failure
on the employer's part to provide the worker with a stool
from which to act as cashier/check out assistant and
furthermore when she brought in her own stool the fact that
this was taken on a number of occasions by the agents of the
employer to be used for other purposes.
In the light of the above I find that the worker was
constructively dismissed from her employment. I do not
recommend reinstatement. My recommendation is that Mr. Tim
O'Leary t/a Centra Supermarket Ltd., Donnybrook shuld pay to
her the sum of #1,500 compensation and that this be accepted
by her in full and final settlement of all claims on the
employer in relation to her employment and its termination."
The worker was referred to by name in the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation.
5. The Union appealed the Rights Commissioner's recommendation
to the Labour Court under Section 13(9) of the Industrial
Relations, Act, 1969 on the grounds that the amount awarded was
insufficient in view of the harassment suffered by the worker. A
Court hearing took place on 22nd July, 1992.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The worker was subjected to continuous mistreatment and
harassment from the manageress from the time the shop was
taken over (details supplied to the Court). The final
incident which led to the worker's resignation was a
deduction in her wages of #26 due to alleged shortages (more
than one person had access to the till).
2. The compensation recommended by the Rights Commissioner
is insufficient given the nature of the treatment meted out
to the worker, the distress caused, loss suffered and future
loss.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. The employer was not aware of any problems between the
worker and the manageress and neither party approached him
regarding same. He visited the shop for short periods every
day. Had he been aware of problems he would have attempted
to rectify them. In fact when he became aware of deductions
been made from staff wages in respect of shortages he
rectified the matter.
2. The worker was in employment for approximately three
months and she was found to be pleasant and courteous.
DECISION:
8. Having considered the submission from the parties the Court
is satisfied that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
reasonable and should be upheld. The Court accordingly rejects
the appeal and so decides.
The Court notes that the respresentative of the Company indicated
at the hearing that any money deducted from wages would be
refunded. The Court expects that this will be done.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
11th August, 1992 Evelyn Owens
M.D.\M.H. ----------------------------
Deputy Chairman