Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95639 Case Number: AD967 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: KELLOR JOINERY SERVICES LIMITED (Represented by GERARD O'KEEFFE & CO. SOLICITORS) - and - A WORKER |
Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. ST 115/95 concerning alleged unfair dismissal.
Recommendation:
The Court upholds the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation and
notes the Company's assurance that the Recommendation will be
implemented.
The Court so decides.
Division: Mr Flood Mr Pierce Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95639 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD796
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
KELLOR JOINERY SERVICES LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY GERARD O'KEEFFE & CO. SOLICITORS)
AND
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No.
ST 115/95 concerning alleged unfair dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
The worker concerned commenced employment with the Company as
a helper in June, 1994. His work involved assisting two
fitters in the installation of windows, doors and patios etc.
His employment was terminated on 24th February, 1995.
The worker claimed that he had been unfairly dismissed and
referred the matter to a Rights Commissioner for
investigation and recommendation. On 24th October, 1995 the
Rights Commissioner recommended as follows:-
"I recommend that the Claimant was unfairly dismissed.
The Claimant's preferred form of redress is compensation
and he claims that he has lost 12 weeks work as a result
of the unfair dismissal. His stated pay in his
Application to Rights Commissioner Form is £300. per
week. I do not feel I can reasonably recommend £3,600.
by way of compensation and in this regard I am prepared
to offer some relief to the employer by recommending
£2,000."
The Rights Commissioner's Recommendation was appealed by the
worker to the Labour Court on 9th November, 1995 under
Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The
Labour Court heard the appeal on 22nd January, 1996.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The worker has been unfairly treated by the Company. He
received no complaints from management concerning his work
and co-operated fully with his colleagues during his
employment. The worker is concerned that he was dismissed a
short time after requesting his terms and conditions of
employment. In the circumstances the Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation is justified.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The worker has appealed the Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation because he feels that the Rights
Commissioner's decision must be enforced "by law". The
worker's comments are pre-emptive insofar as he filed an
appeal immediately without offering the respondent an
opportunity to comply with the Rights Commissioner's
decision.
DECISION:
The Court upholds the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation and
notes the Company's assurance that the Recommendation will be
implemented.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
31st January, 1996 Finbarr Flood
F.B./A.K. _______________
Deputy Chairman