Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95512 Case Number: LCR14973 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: THE RISING SUN TAKEAWAY - and - A WORKER;OVEREND, MCCARRON AND GIBBONS, SOLICITORS |
Alleged unfair dismissal.
Recommendation:
The Court has fully considered the views of both parties as made
in their oral and written submissions, and recommends the claimant
be paid £60, in addition to the monies already paid, in full and
final settlement of this dispute.
The Company should arrange for her to be issued with her P45.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr Keogh Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95512 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14973
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
THE RISING SUN TAKEAWAY
AND
A WORKER
(REPRESENTED BY OVEREND, MCCARRON AND GIBBONS, SOLICITORS)
SUBJECT:
1. Alleged unfair dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker commenced employment in November, 1994 at a rate
of £15 net per night. She worked six and a half to seven
hours per night, four nights per week.
Following a disagreement with her employer in July, 1995, the
worker claimed that she was dismissed unfairly and requested
re-instatement. She referred the dispute to the Labour Court
on 4th September, 1995 under Section 20(1) of the Industrial
Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on
26th October, 1995.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker was responsible for the cash till, but was
not allowed to check it before or after her shifts.
More than one person had access to the till, therefore,
when shortages occurred, it was not always possible to
ascertain who was responsible. On at least three
occasions, following a re-count, the cash was balanced.
2. The worker borrowed money from the till occasionally,
with her employer's consent, and repaid it at the end of
the night. When she bought provisions for the Company
she always put a receipt in the till.
3. The worker was responsible for the cleaning of the
reception area, in addition to taking orders. Until the
night of her dismissal, she was unaware that her
employer was dissatisfied with her performance.
4. Following a disagreement with the Company, the worker's
shifts were reduced from four nights per week to one
night in three weeks. When questioned, the Company
maintained that as the worker was only 'part-time', the
Company could change her hours as required.
5. The worker requested a letter giving the reasons for the
shift reduction. When she called to collect the letter,
she received instead a letter of dismissal and a cheque
for £60.00. She did not receive a P45.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. A few weeks after the worker was employed, the cash till
was short on several occasions. When questioned, the
worker admitted to borrowing money. She was forbidden
from doing so in the future. When shortages occurred on
later dates, the worker denied responsibility.
2. When she was employed, the worker was instructed that
her duties included cleaning the reception area. In
July, on her return from holiday, the employer
discovered the reception area was dirty, greasy and
flies were flying around an overflowing bin. The worker
refused to clean the area, leaving the employer to do
so.
3. A public confrontation followed, between the worker and
the employer, regarding the cleaning of the premises.
The employer maintained that if she had to clean the
premises daily there would be no need to employ the
worker for four shifts per week. The worker then walked
out without giving notice.
4. Several days later the worker returned demanding money.
The Company's solicitor advised the Company to pay her
£60.00 (one week's wages) and a letter advising her that
she was no longer employed by the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has fully considered the views of both parties as made
in their oral and written submissions, and recommends the claimant
be paid £60, in addition to the monies already paid, in full and
final settlement of this dispute.
The Company should arrange for her to be issued with her P45.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
20th November, 1995 Tom McGrath
D.G./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Ms. Dympna Greene, Court Secretary.