FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : GALWAY AUTISM PARTNERSHIP - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Unfair Dismissal
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between the employer and worker in relation to unfair dismissal. The worker's position is that a decision was taken to dismiss him from his employment on his return from annual leave. The worker contends that he had made a formal complaint in relation to how he had been treated by a senior member of staff and that a decision was made to dismiss him as a result.
Management contends that it had financial difficulties and that the dismissal was warranted to achieve the required savings to remain viable into the future.
On the 24th January 2014, 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 the 8th May 2014.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The dismissal of the worker was unfair. After making a complaint in relation to how he had been treated by a colleague, the worker was summarily dismissed on his return from annual leave.
2 The worker was not afforded the principles of natural justice nor fair procedures on the basis that no investigation was carried out in relation to the complaint that he had made. Instead, the employer dismissed him from his employment at the earliest opportunity on his return to work.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The decision to dismiss the worker was taken at board level on the basis of the financial difficulties that existed in the organisation at the time.
2 The employer had no option but to reduce payroll costs in an attempt to protect employment and remain viable into the future.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court was brought under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 and concerns a claim of unfair dismissal. The Claimant was employed on a twelve-month fixed-term contract from 15thOctober 2012. He was employed as a Fundraiser for the organisation.
On 29thJuly 2013 on his return from holidays the Claimant was summoned to a meeting and informed that his employment was terminated with immediate effect. The employer stated that a decision was made by the Board of Management at a meeting on 16thJuly 2013 to terminate the Claimant’s employment on the expiry of his contract as it was no longer financially viable to employ him. Therefore on the 29thJuly 2013 his employment was terminated and he was paid one month’s pay in lieu of notice.
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court is not satisfied that the dismissal was fair. The Court is of the view that an exchange between the Claimant and a Director of the organisation influenced the decision to terminate his employment prior to the expiry of his contract. The Court is also of the view that by the application of normal standards of reasonableness the manner in which the Complainant’s employment was terminated cannot be justified.
Therefore the Court finds that the dismissal was unfair and was in breach of the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures S.I. No 146 of 2000.
In these circumstances the Court recommends that the Claimant should be paid compensation in the amount of €2,500 in full and final settlement of the matter. No part of this award is in respect of pecuniary loss.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
5th June 2014______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.