FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : NUANCE COMMUNICATIONS IRELAND LIMITED - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Dismissal
BACKGROUND:
2. The case concerns a claim by a Worker that her dismissal was unfair.
The employer's position is that the Worker was dismissed because she did not meet the required standards during her probation.
On the 28th June 2012, the Workers referred the dispute to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 19th October 2012.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. After three months working for the company the Worker was asked to attend a Probationary review. Prior to the meeting her performance had not been an issue.
2. Following that meeting the Worker was told she was being dismissed and was escorted from the building. The Worker felt humiliated.
3. She was misled by the Employer regarding the flexibility and amount of additional hours expected of her. The reasons for her dismissal were unfounded.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. During the interview process no facility for working flexible hours was discussed with the Worker.
2. The Employer ensured the Worker received extensive training both in Ireland and Belgium during her probation.
3. The Worker was allowed to collect her personal belongings. It is standard practice to escort employees from the premises.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has carefully considered the extensive written and oral submissions of both parties to this dispute.
The Company employed the complainant on six months’ probation. After a number of months the Company decided that it did not wish to proceed to appoint the complainant to a permanent position.
Following a “Probationary Review” in March 2012 the Company decided to terminate the complainant’s employment. The Complainant contests the grounds upon, and manner in, which she was dismissed.
The Court finds that there is merit in the Complainant’s case regarding the manner in which she was dismissed. Statutory Instrument No 146 of 2000 sets out the procedures to be followed when dealing with disciplinary issues that could affect ones employment. In relevant part they state
- The procedures for dealing with such issues reflecting the varying circumstances of enterprises/organisations, must comply with the general principles of natural justice and fair procedures which include:
• That details of any allegations or complaints are put to the employee concerned;
• That the employee concerned is given the opportunity to respond fully to any such allegations or complaints;
• That the employee concerned is given the opportunity to avail of the right to be represented during the procedure;
- • That the employee concerned has the right to a fair and impartial determination of the issues concerned, taking into account any representations made by, or on behalf of, the employee and any other relevant or appropriate evidence, factors or circumstances.
These principles may require that the allegations or complaints be set out in writing, that the source of the allegations or complaint be given or that the employee concerned be allowed to confront or question witnesses.
- The procedures for dealing with such issues reflecting the varying circumstances of enterprises/organisations, must comply with the general principles of natural justice and fair procedures which include:
For these reasons the Court finds that the manner of the Complainant’s dismissal was unfair and accordingly that there is merit her case. The Court recommends that the Company pay her compensation equal to two month’s salary at the date of her dismissal.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
CR______________________
12th November 2012Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.