Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93449 Case Number: LCR14323 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: BRINKS ALLIED LIMITED - and - A WORKER |
Alleged unfair dismissal.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions and taking into account the
background to the dispute, which is that the claimant gave up his
previous employment prior to the result of his medical examination
being known, the Court recommends that he be paid a sum of #5,000
as compensation for the withdrawal of the offer of employment by
the Company.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93449 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14323
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
BRINKS ALLIED LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Alleged unfair dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned commenced employment with the Company as
a security driver in May 1993. After four weeks in the employment
he underwent a medical examination in accordance with Company
regulations. Following receipt of the medical report the worker
was dismissed on the grounds that he was medically unfit for a
security position in the Company. The worker claimed that he was
unfairly dismissed and referred the dispute to the Labour Court
under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The
worker agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation. The
Court investigated the dispute on the 17th September, 1993. The
hearing was adjourned to enable the Company seek a second
specialist medical report on the worker. Following receipt of
this medical report the Company confirmed its decision to dismiss
the claimant (Details of both medical reports supplied to the
Court). A further Labour Court hearing was held on the 20th
January, 1994.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. When the worker attended the first of two interviews for
the position he informed Management that he had a scar mark
on his back following an operation in 1984 to remove a disc.
The manager noted this statement in writing. The worker
attended a second interview and was subsequently offered
employment. He accepted the position having given his former
employer one week's notice. Management failed to advise the
worker of the necessity for a medical examination prior to
his giving notice to his former employer.
2. The Company's decision to dismiss the claimant was
unfair. He should have been advised to take the medical
examination while still in his old job rather than four weeks
into the new employment. The worker's dismissal has placed a
huge financial burden on his family. He is presently on the
dole with little prospect of future employment.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker applied for and was successful in his
application for the position of security driver subject to a
medical examination. He was informed at interview that his
subsequent employment was conditional on a satisfactory
medical report which was essential for insurance purposes.
2. Following receipt of the first medical report the
Company was left with no option but to dismiss the worker.
The second specialist medical opinion also confirmed the
first diagnosis.
3. Management regrets that the worker left employment to
take up a position with the Company but it acted in good
faith in offering the claimant the position. This kind of
incident has not occured previously in the Company and
Management has taken steps to ensure that it will not occur
again.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions and taking into account the
background to the dispute, which is that the claimant gave up his
previous employment prior to the result of his medical examination
being known, the Court recommends that he be paid a sum of #5,000
as compensation for the withdrawal of the offer of employment by
the Company.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
25th January, 1994 Evelyn Owens
T.O.D./M.M. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.