FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : BLESSINGTON LAKESHORE RESORTS LTD T/A AVON R� CORPORATE & LEISURE RESORT - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY CULLEN & CO. SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Constructive Dismissal
BACKGROUND:
2. In October 2006 an incident occurred in the kitchen of the company with which the worker was employed.The worker, who was in charge of the kitchen, issued an instruction to another staff member which he believed to be reasonable. The staff member threatened and verbally assaulted the worker. He became aggressive and through a pan of hot cooking oil at a wall potentially endangering the safety of the worker and other staff. The worker demanded he leave the kitchen to which the staff member inquired was he being dismissed. The worker replied that he was. The incident was reported to management who agreed that the worker was right to dismiss the staff member for gross misconduct. The following week the worker was told that the owner of the company had decided to re-instate the dismissed worker. The company indicated to the Court by letter dated 7th June, 2007 from it's Solicitors that they would not be participating in any investigation into this matter
The worker referred his claim to the Labour Court on the 5th March, 2007 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 21st June, 2007
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The decision to re-instate the dismissed employee was taken by the owner without any consultation with the worker.It was management that who told the worker of the decision. The worker attempted to bring his concerns and grievance's in relation to the decision to the attention of the owner but was ignored.
2 There was no meetings between the worker and management or the owner to discuss the matter. No regard was had to the potential consequences of the decision for the worker in carrying out his management duties. The refusal to discuss the decision undermined the worker's trust and confidence in management and the owner to such an extent that he felt he had no other option but to resign his position.
3 The failure of the employer to attempt to address the worker's concerns adequately or at all was unreasonable, in breach of contract and amounted to sufficiently serious conduct resulting in the worker feeling compelled to terminate his own employment.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS
4. The Company elected not to appear at the Court Hearing but contended that the worker concerned was not dismissed but had resigned.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court heard this case in the absence of the employer, who has chosen not to appear.
On the uncontested evidence put forward by the claimant, the Court considers that he was constructively dismissed and awards him compensation of €12000 in settlement of his claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
17th July,2007______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.