Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94447 Case Number: LCR14578 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: KYLEMORE BAKERY - and - A WORKER |
Alleged unfair dismissal.
Recommendation:
The Court has considered the written and oral submissions of the
worker together with correspondence from the employer.
The employer did not attend the Court. The Court finds, that
given the contract of employment of the employee, in particular,
the section dealing with probation, the Company did not act
unreasonably in dismissing the employee.
The Court, however, also finds on the evidence produced that the
Company in the manner in which they effected the dismissal did not
adhere to the procedure outlined in Company's handbook.
Given all the circumstances of the case, the Court recommends the
Company pay to the worker concerned a sum equivalent to one week's
salary.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94447 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14578
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
KYLEMORE BAKERY
AND
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Alleged unfair dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The worker commenced employment with the Company on 31st
October, 1993, as a general operative, working nights in
the Dispatch Department. The worker's first year of
employment was to be a probationary period where he
would be assessed at 3, 6 and 9 month intervals. the
worker was dismissed on Monday 18th July, 1994.
2. A claim for alleged unfair dismissal was submitted to
the Labour Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial
Relations Act, 1969 on 18th August, 1994. On 12th
September, 1994, the Company informed the Court that it
would not be attending the investigation. It submitted
in writing the following reasons for the dismissal of
the worker.
"1. His attendance was very poor, he had been
absent on 29 days during his nine months of
employment.
2. His attitude to his Managers and level of
co-operation was totally unacceptable.
3. He had been spoken to on numerous occasions
both by his immediate Managers and the Bakery
Manager for leaving his shift early without
authorisation.
4. He continually failed to "clock off" when his
shift was completed again despite being
instructed to do so.
5. His work performance was not of the standard
required by the Company".
A Labour Court investigation took place on 5th October,
1994.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker resents the accusations made by the Company
when it dismissed him. Contrary to the terms of his
contract, he never received either a verbal or written
warning. The worker received an injury while at work
and was unfairly dismissed by the Company while he was
on sick leave.
2. The worker was very committed to the Company and his job
and he is mystified by the Company's accusations. The
worker's sick leave was certified and much of it can be
explained by the injury he received while at work. The
Company's wage slips will show that the worker completed
his full hours. The worker is seeking compensation for
the Company's unfair treatment of him.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the written and oral submissions of the
worker together with correspondence from the employer.
The employer did not attend the Court. The Court finds, that
given the contract of employment of the employee, in particular,
the section dealing with probation, the Company did not act
unreasonably in dismissing the employee.
The Court, however, also finds on the evidence produced that the
Company in the manner in which they effected the dismissal did not
adhere to the procedure outlined in Company's handbook.
Given all the circumstances of the case, the Court recommends the
Company pay to the worker concerned a sum equivalent to one week's
salary.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
13th October, 1994 Tom McGrath
J.F./M.M. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.