FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : NUI GALWAY (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Disciplinary Sanction.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the Worker's claim that a disciplinary sanction imposed on him was excessive and disproportionate. The Worker referred this case to the Labour Court on the 7th June, 2012, 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 20th March, 2013.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The Worker acknowledged his unwitting involvement in these events.
2.The Worker did not set out to defraud the Employer.
3.The sanction imposed on the Worker was excessive and disproportionate.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.An extremely serious allegation was made against the Worker.
2.The Worker admitted his role in the events.
3.The sanction imposed on the Worker was reasonable in the circumstances of the case.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of a worker under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 that the disciplinary sanction imposed on him in March 2011 was excessive and disproportionate in the circumstances.
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court concurs with the Union’s view. The Court notes that a second employee received the same level of sanction at the same time for very different reasons and consequently the Court is of the view that the sanction imposed on the Claimant was not the appropriate sanction in the circumstances.
The Court is of the view that a final written warning was appropriate, however, such a warning should have been imposed for no longer than one year. Furthermore, the Court does not concur with the decision to place the Claimant on a period of unpaid suspension and therefore recommends that that decision should be overturned.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
16th May, 2013______________________
JMcCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.