FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : CUSHING HOUSE COMMUNITY CHILDCARE C/O CORK CITY CHILDCARE COMPANY LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY PENINSULA BUSINESS SERVICES (IRELAND) LIMITED) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY FIONA FOLEY & CO SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Termination of Employment
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker was offered a fixed term work contract for the position of Childcare Leader in Cushing House with a start date of 28th January, 2008 and ending on 31st December, 2008. Cushing House is a child care service which is managed by a voluntary management committee which planned to open a pre-school and after school service for children from a disadvantaged area of Cork City. Some 4 months into her work contract, her Employer requested references from her previous employers and when these either unavailable or negative in content her employment was terminated . The Worker is alleging that she was treated in an unfair manner and is seeking compensation.
On the 5th September, 2008, 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 8th April, 2009.
The Worker agreed to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The substantive reason for the termination of the Complainant's employment was unfair
2. The manner in which the Employer conducted itself and effected the termination was procedurally unfair.
3. Accordingly, the Employer should give the Worker the sum due and owing for the balance of the contractual term together with compensation in respect of unfair and summary dismissal.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. All pre-school childcare facilities are governed by strict guidelines and the vetting of staff who have access to children must include positive references from past employers and in particular her most recent employer.
2. The formal letter of offer to the Worker clearly stated that her employment was subject to good references.
3. The Committee cannot responsibly operate if a Worker does not have the necessary requirements under the statutory regulations, it was left with no alternative but to terminate the Worker's employment.
RECOMMENDATION:
It appears to the Court that the process by which the Employer decided to terminate the Claimant's employment fell short of the standards of fairness that could be expected from a reasonable Employer.
Accordingly the Court is satisfied that the dismissal was unfair.
The Court recommends that the Employer pay the Claimant compensation in the amount of €15,000 in full and final settlement of her claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
11th May, 2009______________________
JFChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.