FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : RAYMOND COUGHLAN, LICENCED HAULIER - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY IRISH NATIONAL ORGANISATION OF THE UNEMPLOYED) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation IR12043/02/TB
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker was employed as a driver from May, 2002, to 3rd September, 2002, when, he claims he was unfairly dismissed. On the 2nd of September, the worker had parked his lorry under a bridge in Northbrook Avenue Lower, near his house. Sometime during the night the lorry was burned out. When he discovered the burnt-out lorry the next morning, he phoned his employer who, he claims, threatened him. The employer denies this. His case is that he had told the worker to park the lorry in the Brooks Thomas North Wall yard where he had arranged for it to be left at night. The worker claims that he could not gain access to the yard after 5.00 p.m. and so had to park near his home.
The worker referred his case to a Rights Commissioner. The employer did not attend the Rights Commissioners hearing, claiming that notice of the hearing was sent to a wrong address. The Rights Commissioners recommendation was as follows:
"Based on the uncontested evidence submitted on behalf of the claimant it does not appear that he was given the opportunity to explain his side of the story.
I recommend that he be paid €1000 in compensation."
The employer appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on the 10th of June,
2003, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour
Court hearing took place on the 20th of August, 2003.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker was clearly told that he should park the lorry in Brooks Thomas North Wall yard. The employer had made special arrangements to have the lorry parked there at night. Instead, the worker parked the lorry a considerable distance from his home.
2. This was the 4th incident in which the lorry was damaged. The worker had been given a number of verbal warnings about his behaviour. The damage to the truck cost €10,000.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. It was accepted practice that drivers took their lorries home on evenings that they finished work after 5.00 p.m.
2. The worker told his employer that he could not gain access to the Brooks Thomas Yard after 5.00 p.m.
3. The worker was not subjected to any disciplinary notice on warning prior to his dismissal. He was given no contract of employment or details of his terms and conditions of employment.
DECISION:
The Court, having heard the evidence of both sides, is of the view that the dismissal of the driver in the circumstances outlined to the Court was unfair and, accordingly, upholds the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner that he should be compensated by the payment of €1,000.
The Rights Commissioner's recommendation is affirmed and the employer's appeal fails.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
2nd September, 2003______________________
CON/BBDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.