EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEAL(S) OF: CASE NO.
Dawid Glazer - appellant UD1172/2012
against the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner in the case of:
Absolute Hotel Limerick Limited - respondent
under
UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2007
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Mr P. Hurley
Members: Mr T. Gill
Mr F. Dorgan
heard this appeal at Limerick on 4th June 2014
Representation:
_______________
Appellant(s) : Ms Liz Murray, SIPTU, Liberty Hall, Dublin 1
Respondent(s) : Mr. Mairead Crosby,, IBEC, Gardner House, Bank Place,
Charlotte Quay, Limerick
This case came before the Tribunal by way of an appeal by the employee (appellant) against the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner (ref: r-115992-ud-11/GC) under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2007
Appellant’s Case
The appellant gave evidence that he commenced working as a chef for the respondent hotel in November 2009. He enjoyed his work and had a good relationship with colleagues and management. In November 2010 following the appointment of a new head chef he began to encounter difficulties in the workplace. He told the Tribunal that the new head chef was verbally abusive towards him. He tried to address his issues informally with the new head chef without success. He then reported the issue to management by way of letter dated 10 November 2010. He wanted the company to address the issues as they were causing him great concern.
He met with management and met with the head chef as part of the process and matters were resolved. This situation lasted for one week only after which the bullying to which he was being subjected resumed. He was under great stress and was medically certified as being unfit for work due to stress for a number of weeks. He subsequently returned to work and met with the general manager known as (D) who told him that he should speak with the Managing Director of the group of hotels. No such meeting ever took place.
He continued working until 15 May 2011 without any resolution to the issues he had raised. As he had not received any help from the hotel management he tendered his resignation in writing to the company. He was asked to re-consider his decision by (D) but he did not want to return to his position after all he had been through.
Respondent’ Case
The general manager of the hotel (D) gave evidence that the hotel employs 50 employees including 7 chefs and 4 kitchen porters. He (the witness) fulfils the Human Resources function supported by a group operations director.
He told the Tribunal that he did not receive any complaints from the appellant either verbal or written prior to the written complaint of 10 November 2010. He accepted that there were issues between the appellant and the new head chef. Following receipt of the complaint he carried out an investigation. He met with the head chef and the appellant as part of the investigation. He subsequently wrote to the appellant outlining the outcome of the investigation. He assured him by way of this letter, inter alia that the new head chef is obliged to behave in a manner that does not leave him (the appellant) feeling stressed. He also stated that if the appellant wanted to discuss anything, at any time to contact him (the witness) directly. He gave evidence that thereafter the appellant never raised any further issues which he wanted acted upon.
The appellant then reported sick in April 2011 and did not subsequently return to work. (D) received the appellant’s letter of resignation and responded immediately requesting the appellant to return to work to discuss his concerns but he received no further communication from the appellant.
Determination
The Tribunal carefully considered the evidence adduced at the hearing. Section 1 (c) (b) of the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 defines dismissal in relation to an employee as:
“the termination by the employee of his contract of employment with his employer, whether prior notice of the termination was or was not given to the employer, in circumstances in which, because of the conduct of the employer, the employee was or would have been entitled or it was or would have been reasonable for the employee, to terminate the contract of employment without giving prior notice of the termination to the employer,”……
The Tribunal is not satisfied that the appellant met the requisite statutory test concerning constructive dismissal as outlined above. Accordingly the Tribunal dismisses the appeal and upholds the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal
This ________________________
(Sgd.) ________________________
(CHAIRMAN)