Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91554 Case Number: LCR13944 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: CLEAR-MODES LIMITED - and - A WORKER |
Alleged unfair dismissal.
Recommendation:
4. Having considered the submissions made by the worker and in
the absence of any representation by the Company, the Court is of
the opinion that the worker concerned acted unwisely, but in
particular having regard to the embarrassment suffered by her on
two occasions when the Company failed in its obligation to pay her
salary on time the Court takes the view that she should not have
been dismissed. Clearly an organisation which is so punctilious
about its financial affairs is disgracefully at fault when it
demonstrates such negligence when dealing with its payroll.
The Court therefore recommends that the worker be paid a sum of
four weeks' pay in compensation for her unfair treatment.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91554 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13944
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: CLEAR-MODES LIMITED
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Alleged unfair dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker commenced employment with the Company on the 24th
of November, 1990, in the capacity of sales assistant. She was
dismissed on the 2nd of September, 1991. She had worked in three
of the Company's outlets, in various positions including that of
manageress.
The worker's wages for August, 1991 were due to be transferred to
her bank account on Thursday, the 29th of August. No lodgement
was made to her account on that date, and she raised the matter
with the bank and with the Company. At closing-time on Friday the
30th of August, 1991, the worker decided to 'pay herself from the
day's takings' as she had not received her wages. At her request,
this action was witnessed by two colleagues. On the following
Monday the 2nd of September, the worker informed a Director of the
Company by telephone that she had 'paid herself'. On that
afternoon she received a letter of dismissal.
The worker tried to raise the dispute with the Company through the
Labour Relations Commission but did not succeed. She then
referred the dispute to the Labour Court on the 22nd of October,
1991. The Court investigated the dispute on the 29th of January,
1993 (the earliest suitable date following investigation of
Company details). The Company did not attend and was not
represented at the Court hearing.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Payment of wages into the worker's bank account was
frequently made after the due date. On one occasion payment
was made fourteen days late.
2. The Company showed no concern for the worker when she
complained to them of the great embarrassment suffered by her
when she unsuccessfully tried to make a withdrawal from her
bank account..
3. The Company acted unfairly in dismissing the worker. The
events that led to her removing money from the till were as a
direct result of the Company's negligence. In doing this, she
acted in good faith. This is evidenced by the fact that she
had her actions witnessed by her colleagues.
4. During her employment with the Company the worker held
responsible positions, often handling large sums of money.
Her character and approach to her duties were never previously
questioned.
RECOMMENDATION:
4. Having considered the submissions made by the worker and in
the absence of any representation by the Company, the Court is of
the opinion that the worker concerned acted unwisely, but in
particular having regard to the embarrassment suffered by her on
two occasions when the Company failed in its obligation to pay her
salary on time the Court takes the view that she should not have
been dismissed. Clearly an organisation which is so punctilious
about its financial affairs is disgracefully at fault when it
demonstrates such negligence when dealing with its payroll.
The Court therefore recommends that the worker be paid a sum of
four weeks' pay in compensation for her unfair treatment.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
___________________
8th February, 1993 Deputy Chairman.
M.K./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.