FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : H.J.NOLAN (DUBLIN) LTD - AND A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr McHenry Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioners Recommendation IR860/00/CW.
BACKGROUND:
2. The appeal concerns a worker who claims he was employed by the Company to sell hampers from the 15th November, 1999 until 31st December 1999. The worker understood that he would be offered a senior management position in January, 2000. This did not happen. The worker claimed that he was owed a substantial amount of money in lost earnings and expenses. The Company rejected the claim. The dispute has referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation. On the 25th May, 2000 the Rights Commissioner issued his recommendation as follows:
"I recommend that the Company offers and the worker accepts the sum of £300 in respect of invouched expenses to the period to the end of December, 1999 in settlement of this dispute".
(The worker was named in the Rights Commissioner's recommendation).
On the 29th June, 2000 the worker appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court. The Court heard the appeal on the 13th September, 2000.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker's loss of earnings for the months of January and February up to 6th March, 2000 amount to approximately £3,050 and for the period 15th November to 31st December, 1999 to £170
2. A verbal contract of employment was entered into between the worker and the Company to sell hampers until Christmas, 1999 and then a permanent contract in a management position was verbally offered to the worker post Christmas.
3. The worker was deprived of any alternative employment and suffered financial hardship because he deferred any investigation into alternative employment, being thoroughly convinced that the company was going to employ him on a permanent contract.
4. The company acted in a very unprofessional and unethical way and denied the worker any chances of earning a salary. It was only at the end of February that management said to the worker " if a better position or job came along don't turn it down".
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Following a casual meeting with the worker a member of management learned that he was leaving his brother's electrical business because it was in recession. He informed the company that he had Corporate clients. The Company suggested that the worker might approach them to sell smoked salmon over the Christmas period. The Company agreed to employ the worker on a commission basis. Management also informed the worker that if he got on well the Company would discuss with the worker a possible future for him in the Company in some sort of sales role, if he was successful.
2. The worker's performance was very poor. The Company paid the worker £1,500 on sales of £2,000. He was not employed by the Company on a part-time or full time basis. He did contact the Company after Christmas, however Management informed him that it was doubtful if he was a suitable candidate for a job, if an opportunity arose, because of his lack of knowledge of the business.
DECISION:
The Court is satisfied that during the period in respect of which this appeal has been brought, the appellant was not employed under a contract of employment, and that no employer/employee relationship existed. Therefore, the appeal is disallowed.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
5 October, 2000______________________
TOD/SHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.