FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : H SAMUEL (SIGNET PLC.) (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Alleged unfair dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker commenced employment with the Company on a temporary contract on the 29th of September, 1998 and was dismissed on the 28th of October, 1998.
The worker claims that she was unfairly dismissed. She claims that she was not given either a written or verbal warning concerning her work performance.
The Company rejects the claim that the worker was unfairly dismissed. It states that the worker did not attain the standard of performance as required by the Company.
The worker referred the dispute to the Labour Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation. The Court investigated the dispute on the 4th of March, 1999.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker received no written or verbal warning concerning her performance.
2. The worker got on well with other staff members and was never reprimanded by management over the way she performed her duties.
3. There were no complaints from customers and the worker always attained her sales targets.
4. The worker claims that she has been unfairly dismissed.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker was on a temporary contract of employment which could be terminated at any stage if deemed unsuitable.
2. During the course of her employment it became clear to management that the claimant's performance was found to be unsatisfactory.
3. The Company held a further refresher course for all staff but there was still no improvement in the claimant's work performance.
4. The Company rejects the claim that the worker was unfairly dismissed.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court is of the view that the procedures used in the termination of employment of the claimant were flawed and not in accordance with good industrial relations practice. Therefore, the Court recommends that the claimant should be compensated, the Company must pay her a sum of £500. This amount is to include her outstanding notice, holiday and public holiday entitlements.
The Court points out that a serious lack of procedures exists in this Company for employees on temporary contracts and also for those on probation. This situation needs to be rectified immediately, management should seek professional advice and should formulate formal disciplinary and grievance procedures which should be given to all employees in accordance with the legislation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
15th March, 1999______________________
L.W./D.T.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.