UD686/2013

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CLAIM(S) OF:                                                                                               CASE NO.

David Carney – claimant                                                                               UD686/2013

Against

Megazyme International Ireland – respondent

Under

UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2007

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:       Mr P. O'Leary BL

Members:       Mr. T. O'Sullivan

                        Ms E. Brezina

Heard this claim at Dublin on 27th February 2014 and 11th July 2014

Representation:

_______________

Claimant(s):               Ms Siobhan Flockton

Respondent(s):           Ms Mairéad McKenna BL, instructed by:

                                    Mr Peter Woodcock

                                    Woodcock Solicitors, Lincoln House, Lincoln Place, Dublin 2

The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:-

The respondent accepted liability in this case and accordingly the Tribunal only heard evidence in regard to loss and mitigation of loss.

The claimant’s employment with the respondent company ceased on 21^st January 2013. He gave evidence that he initially tried to resolve the situation with the company. From February 2013 he went on jobseekers allowance. He joined two job finder websites and attended a couple of job fairs. He was called for two interviews but was not successful. He had not found alternative employment by the time of the Tribunal hearing. He did not provide a list of jobs applied for to the Tribunal.

In August 2013 he met with a director of the respondent company who wanted to settle the claim the claimant had issued against the company for unfair dismissal. He offered the claimant €10,000 which the claimant refused as the director would not admit it had been an unfair dismissal. He was not offered his job back.

The claimant was cross-examined. The claimant had not provided job application details to the respondent when requested in February 2014. After the director offered him compensation he wanted to discuss it with his mother. He denied that he had sought 2 years’ salary in compensation.   He said that money was not the issue. The director said he regretted what had happened. The company provided him with a reference.

At a second meeting the director offered support from the company if he wished to pursue a master’s degree but he rejected that offer as he did not believe it was genuine. The claimant held an arts degree.

The company director gave evidence. He met with the claimant in August 2013 to discuss his unfair dismissal claim and what could be done to resolve it. It was a cordial meeting. He said that on behalf of the company he regretted what had happened and made an offer of compensation. He did not offer a return to work as the claimant was seeking compensation on his claim form and confirmed that with him. He offered €10k ex-gratia to compensate for the time since the dismissal. The claimant requested time to take advice.

He phoned the claimant 4-6 weeks later to follow up on the offer. The claimant said it was insufficient to compensate for the loss of employment and distress caused. The director was willing to look at the amount again. The claimant said he was advised of a two year maximum award, which the director rejected. He could perhaps have compensated the claimant until he found alternative employment. He also offered to support the claimant if he wished to pursue a course. This was a genuine offer. He provided a reference to the claimant. He did not receive any contact from prospective employers.

Determination:

The respondent conceded that their procedures were incorrect and in the circumstances were unable to contest the claim made by the claimant that he was unfairly dismissed. The Tribunal took evidence of loss and established in mitigation of his loss he had applied for and obtained two interviews in the 18 month period from the date of dismissal to the date of the completion of the hearing of the matter.

The claimant had good qualifications and he did not produce, to the satisfaction of the Tribunal, sufficient evidence to establish his loss on a continuing basis. In the circumstances the Tribunal awards the claimant the sum of €20,000 (twenty thousand euro) under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007.

Sealed with the Seal of the

Employment Appeals Tribunal

This   ________________________

(Sgd.) ________________________

     (CHAIRMAN)