FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : DEVEY HEALTHCARE - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Carberry Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Apology and compensation for loss of earnings
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker commenced employment with the Company as a Head Chef on the 24th September, 2002. A number of incidents occurred during the course of his employment which the worker alleges were caused by a colleague. The worker was dismissed from the Company on the 12th February 2003 which was within his probationary period.
The worker referred his claim to the Labour Court on the 30th June, 2003 in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation. A Labour court hearing took place on the 22nd August 2003. The Company indicated to the Court by letter dated the 14th July 2003 that it would not be attending the hearing neither did it make a written submission.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3.1 During the term of his employment with the Company, the Worker was unable to carry out his duties properly as Head Chef. He was having some difficulty with a work colleague and a number of incidents occurred during that time.
2. He informed his superior (the Manageress) of the situation, but did not receive any satisfaction and was informed that the individual concerned would be leaving soon.
3. The Manageress went on maternity leave in February, he then informed the H.R. Manager of the situation. The H.R. Manager told him that he was being dismissed, his contract was being terminated, effective immediately.
4. On the 12th February, 2003 the worker received a letter from the Company stating that he was being dismissed as he was not in a position to adhere to the terms of his contract and he was therefore deemed to have failed his probationary period.
RECOMMENDATION:
The employer indicated by letter that "we will not be attending the hearing on this issue as we feel there is no case". The Court was therefore presented with written and oral submissions only from the claimant.
Based on the submissions made the Court is satisfied that the claimant was treated badly during his employment with this Company.
It would also appear that a decision to replace him as Head Chef was taken sometime before this actual dismissal.
The Court finds the method of his dismissal to be unacceptable and unfair and awards him €5,000 in compensation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
5th September, 2003______________________
JB/Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.