FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : LARAGAN DEVELOPMENTS LTD - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Alleged unfair dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Roscommon based Company is involved in the construction industry and has Workers on various sites throughout the country. An incident of gross misconduct was alleged to have being witnessed by a security man at the Carrickmines site.The Worker concerned was dismissed and his Union contends that he was not afforded fair procedure, a claim that is refuted by the Company
On the 27th March, 2007, the Worker referred the issue to the Labour Court, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 30th August, 2007.
The Worker agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Union requests for copies of the witness statement were refused by the Company on every occasion, even the Garda who was invited to investigate the allegation failed to get any evidence.
2. The Worker was placed at a disadvantage in trying to defend his good name and his livelihood without being presented with a single shred of evidence.
3.The Worker was dismissed unfairlyas the Company's investigation into the allegations was at best flawed.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The security guard on duty witnessed the Worker known to him as a machine driver, commit an act of gross misconduct, this was reported to management the following day.
2. A meeting between the site manager, the Union representative and the Worker took place, the Worker denied the offence and was subsequently suspended on pay.
3. A further meeting took place between management and the Union to review the details of the case and to give the Worker the opportunity to defend himself. After considering the evidence the claimant was dismissed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the views of the parties expressed in their oral and written submissions, the Court is of the view that the disciplinary procedures adopted by the Company in this case were not carried out in accordance with Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures S.I. No 146 of 2000. Consequently, the Court recommends that the claimant should be paid compensation in the amount of €5,000 in full and final settlement of his claim.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
19th September, 2007______________________
JF/MC.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.