FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : THE LEARNING TREE CR�CHE (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-108360-ir-11/JT
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute arose from the Worker's claim that her employment was unfairly terminated. This matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 16th April 2011 the Rights Commissioner issued the following Recommendation:-
- “I have considered the submissions of both parties. The Claimant's contract of employment was a fixed-term one, expiring on 11 March 2011 (this was extended by three days). The Claimant's contract had come to an end when she was let go.
I do not find the claim well founded and therefore it fails.”
On the 14th December, 2011 the Worker appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 15thMarch, 2012.
3. 1.The Worker was three days into a new three-month verbal contract given to her by the Employer and was told that a (written) contract would be made up as soon as possible.
2.The Worker had been praised for her work and had had no feedback that her job was not safe.
3.The Worker was allowed to take home her uniforms and security pass such that she believed she would be returning to work.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.Only the Employer’s Director had the authority to promise a new contract and, therefore, the Manager did not have that authority.
2.The Worker did not invoke the Employer’s grievance procedure and it was clearly explained to the Worker that she was being given a three-day extension to an existing contract.
3.The Worker participated in the interview process for the post of Cleaner and was aware that there was no automatic guaranteed entitlement to a post.
DECISION:
The matter before the Court is an appeal by the Claimant against a Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation which found against her claim that her employment had been unfairly terminated. The Rights Commissioner found that the Claimant’s contract of employment was fixed-term and had come to an end by effluxion of time.
The Claimant was employed on a fixed-term contract from 13September 2010 until 11March 2011. Her employment ceased on 16March 2010.
Having considered the oral and written submissions of both sides the Court notes the conflict of evidence on what transpired at the 7June 2011 meeting held between Management and the Claimant, to discuss the forthcoming expiry of her fixed-term contract.
The Court finds on the balance of probabilities that on the completion of that meeting the Claimant had a clear understanding that her employment was being extended for a further three months as claimed by her. However, it transpired that her employment was only extended for a further three days. Therefore, the Court finds in favour of the Claimant's claim that her employment was unfairly terminated.
In all the circumstances of this case, the Court recommends that the Employer should pay the Claimant a lump sum compensation payment of €3,000 in full and final settlement of the claim. No part of this award is in respect of pecuniary loss.
Therefore, the Court upholds the Claimant’s appeal and overturns the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
11th April, 2012______________________
COFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Colm O'Flaherty, Court Secretary.