FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : MCHUGH'S CENTRA FOODMARKET, ARTANE - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation IR150/00/GF.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns a worker who commenced employment, in the capacity of shop assistant, on the 14th October, 1999, on 3 months' probation. She was dismissed on the 3rd December, 1999. The employer claims that following an alleged incident of misappropriation of some stock on the 23rd November, 1999, an investigation was carried out by management and, as a consequence of the findings of the investigation, the worker was dismissed forthwith. In order to save her "any embarrassment or discomfort", the employer did not explain to the worker the reason for her dismissal, instead, advising her that she was on probation, was not suitable for position and, accordingly, had to be let go. The worker referred the matter, for investigation, to a Rights Commissioner, who found that there was a "total absence of fair procedures and natural justice" in the case. He recommended that the worker be reinstated with no loss of salary or benefits. The Rights Commissioner's recommendation was appealed by the worker to the Labour Court, on the 5th May, 2000, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Court heard the appeal on the 21st July, 2000.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. No explanation at all was given, at the time, for the dismissal, even after enquiries from the worker as to the reason. Having got on really well with customers and staff alike, and having also been flexible and obliging in her work, an explanation for the dismissal was the least she expected.
2. The allegation by management that the worker had behaved in a dishonest manner is rejected.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. A suspicious incident was brought to the attention of management and, as a result, an investigation was set in train using the store's very advanced stock detection system. The evidence pointed towards gross misconduct on the part of the worker and, as a consequence, management deemed it apropriate that she be dismissed.
2. To avoid embarrassment or discomfort to the worker and her colleagues, management decided not to reveal the evidence it had obtained in relation to the matter. She was advised that she was unsuitable for the position and, being on probation, her employment was terminated.
DECISION:
The Court, having considered all the information supplied, agrees with the Rights Commissioner's findings that there was an absence of fair procedures and natural justice in this case.
The Court, therefore, upholds the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
28th July, 2000______________________
MK/MKChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.