Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93302 Case Number: AD9346 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: HENRY DALE LIMITED - and - A WORKER |
Appeal by the Company against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. B.C. 81/93 concerning the alleged unfair dismissal of the worker.
Recommendation:
7. Having considered the submissions made the Court is of the
opinion that the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation should
stand.
The Court so decides.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93302 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD4693
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: HENRY DALE LIMITED
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the Company against Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation No. B.C. 81/93 concerning the alleged unfair
dismissal of the worker.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker commenced employment with the Company on 8th
January, 1993 and was dismissed on 15th January, 1993. The reason
given for the dismissal was that he was signing-on and in receipt
of unemployment benefit during his period of employment. The
worker denied the allegation and referred the dispute to a Rights
Commissioner for investigation and recommendation.
3. The Rights Commissioner investigated the dispute on 15th
April, 1993 and issued the following findings and recommendation
dated 30th April, 1993.
"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 note the clear and emphatic evidence given by the
worker.
2. The evidence given on behalf of the Employer was given
second hand by a person who was not in the employment of
Henry Dale Limited, at the time of the incident in
question.
3. I therefore must conclude that authenticity would seem to
surround the evidence of the worker"
and he recommended
"In the light of the above I must hold that the termination of
the employment of the worker on the date in question is
unfair. I do not recommend reinstatement.
My recommendation is that Henry Dale Limited, should make an
ex-gratia payment of #100 to the worker and that he accept
this in full and final settlement of all claims on the
employer in relation to his employment and its termination".
The worker was referred to by name in the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation.
4. The Company appealed the Rights Commissioner's recommendation
to the Labour Court under Section 13(9) of the Industrial
Relations Act, 1969. The Court heard the appeal on 31st May,
1993.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The worker was given a F.A.S. form to complete on the day
he commenced employment and instructed to lodge it at his
local Employment Exchange on the following Monday. He failed
to do so and on checking with the Employment Exchange later in
the week the Employer discovered that the worker was still
claiming unemployment benefit.
2. The worker was also unsatisfactory regarding time-keeping
and his general attitude to work.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The worker commenced employment on a Friday and his
employer was aware of the fact that he was in receipt of
unemployment benefit and gave him permission to sign-off on
the following Thursday (the worker's signing-on day).
2. The worker refutes the suggestion that he was a bad
time-keeper and had a bad work attitude.
3. The worker was not given any reason for his dismissal when
he was let go.
DECISION:
7. Having considered the submissions made the Court is of the
opinion that the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation should
stand.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
___________________
14th June, 1993. Deputy Chairman.
M.D./J.C.