EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
CLAIM(S) OF: CASE NO.
Thomas O'Halloran UD625/2013
MN322/2013
against
Ballykisteen Hotel Limited
under
UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2007
MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2005
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Mr. N. Russell
Members: Mr. J. Hennessy
Mr. D. McEvoy
heard this case in Thurles on 11 November 2014
Representation:
_______________
Claimant(s): Mr. Ciarán O’Mara for Ms. Anne Brennan,
O'Mara Geraghty McCourt,Solicitors,
51Northumberland Road, Dublin 4
Respondent(s): There was no attendance at the hearing by or on behalf of
Mr. Jim Hamilton, BDO Simpson Xavier,
Beaux Lane House, Mercer Street Lower, Dublin 2
The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:-
The Claimant worked as a Restaurant Manager in the Ballykisteen Hotel and was in the employment of the Respondent for in or about 7 years prior to his Dismissal.
The Claimant’s Contract of Employment sets out clear procedures for dealing with Disciplinary issues.
The Dismissal of the Claimant occurred on the 9th of March 2013 for Gross Misconduct which appears to have related to alleged interference with Company Property. In his evidence, the Claimant explained that the allegation levied against him was that he had interfered with a security camera.
The Claimant explained that while on duty in the bar area of the Hotel he noticed handprints on a wall which he sought to investigate. On doing so he noted that something had been installed in proximity to where the handprints were and on examining it he quickly discovered that it was, in fact, a surveillance camera. His fellow employees who were there at the time also saw the camera. He replaced it and discussed the matter with his Deputy Manager.
He was off work for a number of days but on his return he was asked to attend a meeting. He was told at the meeting that it was Disciplinary in nature and that he could have a witness. The Hotel’s Wedding Co-ordinator was nearby and he asked her to accompany him.
At the beginning of the meeting he did not know who was chairing but the General Manager was present and did not speak. He was told that he knew why he was there; when he protested that he did not, the Interviewer asked him not to take him “for a mug” and then introduced himself as an external Security Advisor.
It was alleged that the Claimant had purposefully sought to locate and interfere with surveillance cameras which the Claimant resolutely denied.
The General Manager and Interviewer left the Meeting briefly and then came back offering the Claimant the option of resigning or being fired. When he refused resignation he was handed what was clearly a pre-prepared letter terminating his employment forthwith.
Fortunately for the Claimant he secured alternative employment after 6 weeks thereby mitigating his losses which must be reflected in the low award that follows.
The Tribunal is of the view that the Claimant’s dismissal was both unwarranted and grossly unfair. The evidence before the Tribunal is indicative of no wrongdoing whatsoever on the Claimant’s part and the Tribunal has to wonder at the motivation of the Employer.
The Claimant was denied a process that would meet even minimum standards and was treated unfairly. The Company failed on almost every conceivable ground and showed a complete lack of respect for the Claimant as an employee. Where was the fairness here or, indeed, the basis for any Disciplinary Action at all? Where was the investigation? At what point was the Claimant given an opportunity to be heard and to defend himself? Where were the principles of Natural Justice adhered to?
This was a clear case of Unfair Dismissal. The Claimant is entitled to compensation. The Tribunal can only award his actual losses of €2,925.00 as the Claimant through his personal endeavours took steps to mitigate his losses which he did by securing alternative employment in the same discipline and at the same salary level after 6 weeks. His resolve in this regard is a credit to him. Accordingly an award of €2,925.00 (this amount being equivalent to six weeks’ gross pay at €487.50 per week) is made to the Claimant in respect of his Unfair Dismissal under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007.
The Claimant is also entitled to Notice Pay of €1,950.00 (this amount being equivalent to four weeks’ gross pay at €487.50 per week) which is hereby awarded under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2005.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal
This ________________________
(Sgd.) ________________________
(CHAIRMAN)