FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
CATHOLIC PRIMARY SCHOOL MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (REPRESENTED BY MILLETT & MATTHEWS SOLICITORS) - AND - A WORKER REPRESENTED BY MP GUINNESS B.L. (INSTRUCTED BY CULLEN & CO. SOLICITORS)
|
SUBJECT:
1. Unfair Dismissal
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between the worker and his former employer in relation to alleged unfair dismissal. The worker contends that he was dismissed during his probationary period without being afforded fair procedures. He contends that an alleged probationary meeting was actually disciplinary in nature yet he was not made aware of this nor was he offered the opportunity to have representation at the meeting.
On the 24th May 2013, the worker referred the matter 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 23rd August 2013.
The employer was notified of the date and time of the hearing but did not attend and was not represented.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The worker was not afforded the principles of natural justice or fair procedures during the course of his employment. He had not been provided with a copy of the employer's disciplinary procedures and the employer conducted disciplinary meetings without offering the worker the right of representation.
2 The worker was treated very badly by the employer and the dismissal was unfair on the basis that management did not follow its own procedures nor did it observe the principles of the relevant Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary procedures.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court finds it regrettable that the employer chose not to participate in the Court's investigation of this dispute and to avail of the opportunity to put forward its version of the events giving rise to the dispute.
On the uncontested submissions of the Claimant the Court is satisfied that in reaching the decision to terminate the Claimant's employment the employer failed to observe the terms of its own disciplinary procedure. Nor did it observe the procedural requirement of the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures (S.I. 146 of 2000)
In all the circumstances the Court is satisfied that the Claimant's dismissal was unfair. The Court recommends that the Claimant be paid compensation by the employer in an amount equal to six month's salary.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
3rd October 2013______________________
AHChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.