FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : RONAN LAWLESS TRADING AS FORSTER COURT HOTEL - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS' UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Compensation.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Claimant commenced working with the Forster Court Hotel in April 2010. Prior to Christmas of the same year the Hotel closed for renovations and she along with the rest of the staff were advised that their jobs were safe and that once the renovations were completed they would be re-employed. On 24th March 2011 her Employer advertised in a local newspaper looking for staff in the hotel. Contrary to what she had been previously told she had not been offered her old job back. To date she has not been given any explanation as to why she was dismissed nor given any reference which has made it difficult for her to explain to potential new employers as to why she is no longer working for the Hotel.
On the 29th September, 2011 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 15th May, 2012.
The Union agreed to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Claimant was not actively looking for work as she believed that she was on temporary lay-off and it would be only a matter of time before she would be re-employed in her previous position.
2. The Employer has treated the Claimant in a totally unacceptable manner and she has suffered considerable financial loss as a result. The Union is asking the Court to award compensation to the Claimant in light of the manner in which she was treated.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Employer issued a fax to the Labour Court on 4th May 2012 advising that on account of his objection to any claim being made to the Court he would not be making any submission regarding the case nor would he be attending the hearing.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court finds it regrettable that the Employer declined the opportunity to participate in this investigation and to put forward its version of the events giving rise to the dispute.
With regard to the substance of the dispute, the Court accepts, on the uncontested submissions made on behalf of the Claimant, that the circumstances giving rise to her dismissal, and the manner in which she was treated in respect to the other matters referred to in her submission to the Court, fell significantly short of the standard of fairness normally expected from a reasonable Employer.
In particular the Court is satisfied that the Employer did not follow any normal procedures leading to the termination of the Claimant's employment. It is also clear that the Claimant was given to understand, at all material times, that she would be re-employed and was never informed to the contrary.
Having regard to all the circumstances of the case the Court recommends that the Employer pay compensation to the Worker in the amount of€15,000 in full and final settlement of all claims against the Employer.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
22nd May, 2012______________________
JFChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.