Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92380 Case Number: LCR13808 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: THE PATRICKSWELL GRILL - and - A WORKER;PHILIP J. CULHANE & COMPANY SOLICITORS |
A dispute regarding the alleged unfair dismissal of a worker.
Recommendation:
4. Having considered the uncontested submission on behalf of the
claimant the Court has come to the conclusion that her summary
dismissal was unfair. The Court therefore recommends that she be
paid the sum of #120 compensation.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92380 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13808
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: THE PATRICKSWELL GRILL
and
A WORKER
(REPRESENTED BY PHILIP J. CULHANE & COMPANY SOLICITORS)
SUBJECT:
1. A dispute regarding the alleged unfair dismissal of a worker.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The worker was employed by the Company, which operates a
fast food restaurant, from 6th January, 1992. The worker's
rate of pay was #2 per hour and her work involved operating
the till, serving good and cleaning. In common with all of
the other workers, the worker was employed in a part-time
capacity.
2. The worker was dismissed with effect from 6th February,
1992, when she was taken ill at work. The dispute was
referred to the Rights Commissioner's service, but the Company
declined to attend. The worker submitted the dispute to the
Labour Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1969, by letter dated 18th June, 1992. A Labour Court
investigation took place in Limerick on 15th October, 1992
(the earliest suitable date to both parties). The Company
declined to attend the investigation.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company never expressed any dissatisfaction with the
performance of the worker, in fact the opposite was the case
(details supplied). The worker became ill at work on 6th
February, 1992 and had to go home. The employer became
abusive towards her when informed and the next day dismissed
the worker claiming that she was slow (details supplied).
2. The worker was dismissed without reason and did not
receive any pay in lieu of notice. Her personal circumstances
of the time (details supplied) made this all the more
difficult. The worker had in the same week as her dismissal
been praised by the employer for her work and asked when she
wished to take her summer holidays.
RECOMMENDATION:
4. Having considered the uncontested submission on behalf of the
claimant the Court has come to the conclusion that her summary
dismissal was unfair. The Court therefore recommends that she be
paid the sum of #120 compensation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
__________________
30th October, 1992. Chairman.
J.F./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.