Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94164 Case Number: AD9457 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: CELTIC HAMPERS LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal by the Company against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation BC432/93 concerning the alleged unfair dismissal of a worker.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is
satisfied that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
reasonable in the circumstances and should be upheld.
The Court accordingly rejects the appeal and so decides.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94164 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD5794
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
CELTIC HAMPERS LIMITED
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the Company against Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation BC432/93 concerning the alleged unfair
dismissal of a worker.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The worker commenced employment with the Company in
October, 1992 as a seasonal warehouse foreman. He was
laid off in February, 1993 and recommenced work in July,
1993. In October, 1993, he was instructed to take over
in one of the Company's warehouses which he did with the
assistance of another worker. On 19th November, 1993,
the worker's employment was terminated. The Company
stated that his work was unsatisfactory.
2. The dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner and an
investigation was held on 9th February, 1994. The
Rights Commissioner in his recommendation issued on 22nd
February, 1994 recommended:-
" In the light of the above my decision is that
Celtic Hampers should pay to the worker the sum of
#600 and that this be accepted by him in full and
final settlement of this claim".
The worker's name was used in the recommendation.
The Company appealed the recommendation (BC432/93) to
the Labour Court on 11th March, 1994. The Court heard
the appeal on 11th August, 1994 (the earliest date
suitable to the parties).
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Management lost confidence in the worker following a
number of incidents.
2. The worker was given two verbal warnings in connection
with his work as a line supervisor.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker did not receive written or verbal warnings in
relation to any aspect of the performance of his work.
2. No written explanation was given to the worker as to why
he was dismissed.
DECISION:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is
satisfied that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
reasonable in the circumstances and should be upheld.
The Court accordingly rejects the appeal and so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
25th August, 1994 Evelyn Owens
P.O'C./M.M. ____________
Chairman