LCR20615

SUBJECT:
1. Dismissal.


BACKGROUND:

2. This case concerns a dispute between the Company and a former employee in relation to alleged bullying, harassment and unfair dismissal. The worker's position is that Management did not follow procedures in relation to his complaint of bullying and harassment and his dismissal while still on probation was unfair .

Management's position is that it followed the appropriate procedures at all times in relation to both the workers claims and his dismissal. It contends that the worker was dismissed as a result of an unsuccessful period of probation despite an extension of the probationary period and continued support. Management reject the allegation of bullying and harassment.

On the 21st December 2012 the worker referred his 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 20th September 2013.

UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1. The claimant made a complaint of bullying and harassment against a fellow worker. A statement was to be compiled and given to the Claimant and he too was to compile a statement as to his understanding of the issues complained of. These statements were to be used as the basis to resolve the issue between the parties. The statement of the other worker was never provided to the Claimant so a successful resolution of the dispute was impossible.

2. The decision had already been made to dismiss the Claimant as no effort was made to resolve issues that arose during the course of the employment. The Claimant had identified areas where he felt further support was necessary. The agreed action plans to assist in his continued development were never put in place.


COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

4 1 There were interpersonal difficulties that arose during the course of the Claimant's employment and these difficulties were addressed as they occurred and staff continued to work together. Management does not accept that there were incidences of bullying and harassment against the worker during the course of his employment.

2 The worker was ultimately dismissed on the basis of an unsuccessful probationary period, specifically in relation to communication and interpersonal skills and dietary knowledge of the residents. All aspects of these difficulties had been previously raised with the worker and could have been resolved.

RECOMMENDATION:

The matter before the Court was brought under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and concerns a claim by the Claimant of unfair dismissal and failure to investigate a complaint he made.

Having considered the submissions made and the evidence given at the hearing, the Court finds that there were procedural deficiencies in the termination of the Claimant's employment.

The Claimant's probationary period was extended for a period of three months as he was on annual leave at the point when it was due to expire. The employer had identified shortcomings in the Claimant's work/communications skills while the Claimant himself had requested training in areas he was not proficient in. However, no action plan was put in place to address these.

The Claimant was notified by letter dated 27th August 2012 of a meeting to be held on 29th August 2012 to address incidents which he had submitted a written complaint of. These issues were not discussed at the meeting and instead the employer informed him that his probationary period was unsuccessful and he was given notice of the termination of his employment.

In all the circumstances of this case, the Court is of the view that the Claimant's dismissal was unfair and awards the sum of €5,000 in full and final settlement of all matters relating to his employment with the employer.

The Court so recommends.



Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Caroline Jenkinson
8th October, 2013.______________________
AH.Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.