FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : BLOOMS HOTEL (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Alleged unfair dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker commenced employment on a casual basis with the Hotel on the 21st of May, 1995, and subsequently took up full employment on the 21st of October, 1995. She was employed as a food and beverage service waitress and was dismissed on the 4th of April, 1996.
The worker was asked by the General Manager to do supervisory duties in the bar area. She agreed to this for a period of time and then reverted back to her position as a waitress. On the 4th of April, 1996, she was called to a meeting with the General Manager and was told that she was unsuitable for the job. When she asked if her work was at fault she was told "no, you are just not suitable to this Hotel."
The Union wrote to the Hotel requesting a reason for the dismissal and was informed that the worker was unsuccessful in completing her probationary period. The Union responded by pointing out that the worker had long since completed her probationary period which is three months, as per the Union/Hotel agreement. The Union requested the hotel to attend the Labour Relations Commission and, failing that, a Rights Commissioner's hearing, but the Hotel refused to attend either.
The Union referred the dispute to the Labour Court on the 25th of August, 1997, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 5th of November, 1997. The Hotel did not attend the hearing but was represented by IBEC. The worker agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker had been employed by the Hotel for 10 years on a previous occasion. There had been no problem with her work on that occasion and she was not told of any problems during her most recent employment. The worker was given no valid reason for the dismissal. She was asked to do supervisory duties which she agreed to although it involved her changing her shifts to oblige the Hotel. If the Hotel was unhappy with her work performance why did it ask her to act as a supervisor?
2. The probationary period in the Union/Hotel agreement is three months. The worker was employed for almost eleven months before she was unfairly dismissed. Other workers in the Hotel were shocked at her dismissal. The worker was given no warnings, either verbal or written, about her work and the Hotel failed to follow the grievance procedures as set down in the Union/Hotel agreement.
HOTEL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The restaurant in the Hotel has been incurring major losses recently, with a total deficit of £90,000 in 1995. Agreement was reached with the Union to reduce the number of staff allocated to the breakfast and evening dinner roster. It was essential that each member of the restaurant staff worked towards improving the service in the restaurant. Following the worker's commencement in her full-time position, it was felt that her performance fell far short of what was required in the Hotel. She had been verbally informed of this on a number of occasions. Her attitude to both staff and customers was deemed to be inappropriate. The Hotel was left with no alternative but to dismiss her.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court finds that the Company did not abide by its agreement on probation or its grievance procedures.
No reasonable explanation was given to the claimant for her dismissal, and the Court is not satisfied that she was made aware of any perceived short-comings.
The Court finds that the dismissal was unfair, and that the claimant's treatment by the Company was unsatisfactory.
The Court recommends that the Company pays the claimant a lump sum of £600 in compensation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
20th November, 1997______________________
C.O'N./D.T.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.