FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : FINGAL COUNTY COUNCIL - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY BOWLER GERAGHRTY & CO SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner Recommendation No: r-109543-ir-11-MH
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns an appeal by the worker of Rights Commissioner Recommendation No: r-109543-ir-11-MH. The issue concerns the worker (an employee of Fingal County Council) who was appointed by the Council to be a director of a Company which controlled Sporting Fingal Football Club. The worker was subsequently disciplined by the Council for making payments to football players on receipt of funding from the FAI. Management contends that the worker was specifically instructed not to make the payments. The worker contends that he was discharging his role as Company director when he took the decision to make payments.
The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation. His Recommendation issued on the 14th March 2012, and recommended that the sanction of two weeks suspension without pay be reduced to four days suspension without pay.
On the 5th April 2012, the worker appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 28th June, 2012.
WORKER'S ARGUMENT:
3 1 The worker was a Council nominated director of the Company. In the instant case, there was legal advice provided to him by the Council that his obligations, in relation to the payments, was to the Company as a director. In the circumstances, the worker acted on the basis of the advice given to him and made the payments. These are the actions that led to his unfair and inappropriate disciplinary sanction.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 As a Council nominated director, his function was to protect the interests of the Council while acting as a Company Director. In addition he was directed by senior management in relation to making the payments yet failed to comply with the instructions.
DECISION:
The Court accepts that the worker in this case acted bona fide and on legal advice provided by the Coucil in what he regarded as the discharge of his duties asa director of the Company. He was, however, appointed as a Director of the Company in his capacity as an employee of the Council and in that capacity he was obliged to have full regard to lawful instructions given by his employer. This should be accepted by the worker in respect of the incident giving rise to this dispute and in the future.
Having regard to all the circumstances of the case the Court does not believe that the imposition of a disciplinary sanction was warranted in this case. The recommendation of the Rights Commissioner is amended accordingly.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
25th July 2012______________________
AHChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.