Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93510 Case Number: LCR14224 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: DUBLIN AIRLINE CATERING - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the alleged unfair dismissal of a worker.
Recommendation:
4. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the
claimant, the Court has come to the conclusion that she was to an
extent a victim of circumstances which were not of her making and
that dismissal is too extreme a penalty notwithstanding the fact
that the incident occurred during a probationary period.
Accordingly, the Court recommends that she be offered
re-employment on a six months' probationary period from the date
of issue of this recommendation.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93510 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14224
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: DUBLIN AIRLINE CATERING
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the alleged unfair dismissal of a worker.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company employed the worker as a catering assistant in
March, 1993. She was dismissed on 7th April, 1993 after 3
weeks in employment.
2. On 6th April, 1993, the Company organised a function at
the A.L.S.A.A. Sports Complex. The worker and her colleagues
were invited. At the end of the evening a row developed
between some staff and invited guests and ended in a physical
exchange which necessitated the intervention of the Gardai.
No arrests were made.
3. The following morning 3 workers were summoned separately
to the office of the Personnel Manager. One of the workers
received a verbal reprimand, the other received a final
written warning, while the worker involved in the Labour Court
investigation was dismissed.
4. The Union met the Company on 11th May, 1993. The Company
was satisfied that the worker has performed well during her
employment but in the circumstances the Company was not
prepared to re instate her. The Company also refused to
attend a Rights Commissioner's investigation or at the Labour
Relations Commission.
5. On 6th September 1993, the Union referred the dispute to
the Labour Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial
Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court investigation took place
on 11th October, 1993. The Company declined an invitation to
attend the investigation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker was dismissed as a result of a physical
exchange at the end of a Company function. The exchange would
not have developed had Company management remained until the
end of the function The Company's function lacked
organisation. The lack of supervision, where free drinks were
available to young staff (thereby encouraging
over-indulgence), resulted in the particular incident which
cannot be blamed on the worker concerned.
2. The Union is not trying to excuse what occurred on 6th
April, 1993. It is however concerned at the inequality of
treatment of the worker as compared to her 2 colleagues. The
Company has acknowledged the worker's ability. It is also
aware that the worker did not start the incident. The Union
contends that the worker received the ultimate sanction
without the benefit of a thorough investigation or the
presence of the shop steward. Natural justice did not apply
in this case and the Union is seeking the worker's
reinstatement.
RECOMMENDATION:
4. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the
claimant, the Court has come to the conclusion that she was to an
extent a victim of circumstances which were not of her making and
that dismissal is too extreme a penalty notwithstanding the fact
that the incident occurred during a probationary period.
Accordingly, the Court recommends that she be offered
re-employment on a six months' probationary period from the date
of issue of this recommendation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
______________________
19th October, 1993. Deputy Chairman.
J.F./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.