FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : GORMALLY INVESTMENTS LTD T/A THE SQUARE INN - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Unfair Dismissal
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between the employer and worker in relation to alleged unfair dismissal. Management contends that it dismissed the worker after attempting to inform her on numerous occasions that her performance was not acceptable, that customers had made several complaints about her and that her attitude had resulted in a loss of revenue for the business.
The worker's representative contends that no complaints were formally outlined to the worker in relation to her performance and that she was not given an opportunity to respond. It is further alleged that she was not allowed representation at a disciplinary meeting and that the decision to dismiss the worker had already been made prior to hearing the worker's response.
The matter was referred to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 11th April, 2012. The worker agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The worker has not been afforded fair procedures or natural justice. The employer dismissed the worker unfairly, did not allow representation rights during the disciplinary process and failed to follow best practice in terms of dealing with disciplinary matters.
2 In all the circumstances of this case, the worker's dismissal is unfair and appropriate compensation is being sought.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 Management dismissed the worker on the basis of her performance despite making numerous attempts at seeking an improvement.
2 Management was advised that as the worker had less than one years' service with the Company, it was unnecessary to follow its disciplinary procedures and that she could be summarily dismissed if necessary.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has given careful consideration to both the written and oral submissions of the parties. The dismissal procedures which applied to the termination of the Claimant’s employment were in the Court’s view flawed. The employee was not afforded fair procedures in accordance with the terms of the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures S.I. No. 146 of 2000.
Furthermore, the Court notes that the employer confirmed that it did not follow its own disciplinary procedures as it was of the belief that it was not obliged to do so as the Claimant has less than one year’s service.
The Court finds that the dismissal of the Claimant was unfair on both procedural and substantive grounds and in all the circumstances awards her compensation in the amount of €5,000.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
21st May 2012______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.