Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94469 Case Number: AD9488 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: DOHERTY TIMBER LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. BC222/94 concerning alleged unfair dismissal.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is of
the view that the appellant was not unfairly dismissed and
accordingly upholds the Rights Commissioner's recommendation and
rejects the appeal.
In view of the undisputed fact that the incident that led to the
dismissal was a first offence and taking into account the age of
the appellant the Court suggests to the Company that in the event
of a suitable vacancy occurring in 6 months time they should
sympathetically consider offering him employment.
The Court so decides.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94469 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD8894
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
DOHERTY TIMBER LIMITED
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation No. BC222/94 concerning alleged unfair
dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned in the dispute commenced employment with
the Company in January, 1994. He was dismissed from
employment on 22nd July, 1994.
The Company claims that the incidents which led to the
worker's dismissal were a serious breach of discipline. The
incidents involved the worker driving a side-loading vehicle
without permission and using abusive behaviour towards
management.
The dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for
investigation and recommendation. The Rights Commissioner on
4th August, 1994 recommended as follows:-
"In the light of the above my recommendation is that I
must uphold the position of the employer in this matter
and therefore the claim by the claimant must fail".
The Rights Commissioner's recommendation was appealed by the
Union to the Labour Court on 7th September, 1994 in
accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 15th
November, 1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker regrets his action of 15th July, 1994. His
attitude towards management was out of character and was
due to lack of experience.
2. The Union accepts that the worker's actions were
unacceptable but contends that the altercation that took
place should not have resulted in his dismissal.
3. Management had no complaints regarding the worker's
performance record prior to the incident of 15th July,
1994.
4. The worker is a member of a large family and employment
with the Company is an opportunity for him to escape the
jobless and poverty traps.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENT:
4. 1. The worker's use of Company equipment and his abusive
threatening behaviour towards management are extremely
serious offences and left management with no option but
to dismiss him.
DECISION:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is of
the view that the appellant was not unfairly dismissed and
accordingly upholds the Rights Commissioner's recommendation and
rejects the appeal.
In view of the undisputed fact that the incident that led to the
dismissal was a first offence and taking into account the age of
the appellant the Court suggests to the Company that in the event
of a suitable vacancy occurring in 6 months time they should
sympathetically consider offering him employment.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
13th December, 1994 Evelyn Owens
F.B./M.M. ____________
Chairman