FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : WEXFORD DISABILITY DEVELOPMENT (CIL) LIMITED. - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Termination of contract without reason
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker commenced her employment on 4th February 2008 in the post of FAS Community Employment Supervisor / Programme Manager with Wexford Disability Development Limited and ended on 28th November, 2008. The Union contends that the manner of her termination of employment was both irregular and unacceptable as CE Supervisors normally continue in employment as the scheme rolls over and continuity of service continues.
On the 13th August, 2009 the Union 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 27th April, 2010.
The Union agreed to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. If there were issues regarding her work performance they should have been raised in the normal practice of good industrial relations and dealt with accordingly.
2. The conditions for Trade Union approval of CE schemes states that Supervisors are not obliged to re-apply for their positions for each contract period.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Worker had signed a fixed term contract of employment dated 11th February, 2008 which clearly states that the termination date is 28th November 2008. Her employment ended when the fixed term contract ended.
2. The Worker was advised in writing that she could if she wished re-apply for the position when a notification was advertised in the local newspaper in early December, 2008.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issue before the Court concerns the Union’s claim on behalf of an Employee who had been employed as a Community Employment Scheme Supervisor that her employment was terminated without reason on 19th November 2008.
The Employer stated that the employment was terminated in accordance with her fixed term contract. It held that the scheme had come to an end and there was no further requirement for her services.
The Union stated that approval for the renewal of the Community Employment Scheme has been given in July 2008 for 2008/2009, this was not disputed by the Employer.
The Court notes that the letter of termination dated 19th November 2008 to the Claimant stated that“we wish to advise you that should you wish to apply for the FAS scheme 2008/2009 with the Company, a notification of same will be advertised in The Wexford People newspaper in early December.”
While there was some dispute before the Court as to the period of time the Company was closed at the end of its contract in November 2008, it would appear that it was only closed for two days.
The Court also notes that it was accepted by the Employer that there were no problems with the Claimant’s performance.
In all the circumstances of this case the Court is of the view that the non-renewal of her contract constituted an injustice to her and accordingly the Court recommends that she should be compensated by the payment of an award of €3,500 in full and final settlement of the claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
19th May, 2010______________________
JFCaroline Jenkinson
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.