EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
CASE NO.
UD613/2014
CLAIM OF:
Paul Chandler
against
Ailesbury Commercial And Industrial Security Limited T/A Ailesbury Services - Respondent
under
UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS 1977 TO 2007
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Ms O. Madden B.L.
Members: Mr J. O’Neill
Mr. N. Dowling
heard this claim at Dublin on 11th June 2015
Representation:
Claimant: Ms. Sarah O’Mahoney BL instructed by:
John Hennessy, Hennessy & Perrozzi Solicitors, Burgundy House, Forster Way, Swords, Co. Dublin
Respondent: Not Present or Represented
The claim was scheduled to be heard by this division of the Tribunal at 2.30pm on the 11th June 2015 in Davitt House, 65a Adelaide Road, Dublin 2. Having waited a period of 20 minutes to await the arrival, if any, of the respondent, the hearing commenced at 2.50pm.
Claimant’s Case:
The claimant commenced employment as a Security Officer on the 5th May 2008. In 2010 he was promoted to the position of Supervisor. He worked in premises in the shopping centres in the Dublin 11 and south Dublin areas. In 2010/2011 a General Manager (GM) took over responsibility of the security side of the respondent company, the respondent was also involved in supplying cleaning services to clients.
In 2012 the claimant suffered a non-work related illness while at work and was absent on certified medical leave for a period of four months. On his return he was transferred to a shopping centre in the Dublin 9 area.
In March 2013 GM informed the claimant that the company no longer required two Supervisors and he was selected to be demoted to Security Officer. Some months later this position of Supervisor was advertised. The claimant told the Tribunal he was not offered the position even though he had experience in the role.
In November 2013 GM required staff to work in a shopping centre in Balbriggan. GM told the claimant that the Managers of the shopping centres in Dublin 11 and Dublin 9 no longer wanted him to work in their premises. GM wanted him to go to Balbriggan. The claimant told the Tribunal that he had no transport but would have no problem working in Balbriggan if his shifts were scheduled around the express bus timetable.
On the 5th December 2013 GM texted the claimant to go to work in Balbriggan on a spilt shift from 5.30am to 12.30am. The claimant replied that he could not go. The claimant told the Tribunal that he knew that as he had declined to attend the Balbriggan premises GM would not roster him for any shifts in the near future. This had happened to him in the past when he had declined to work a shift due to personal difficulties. This lack of shifts could continue for a number of weeks.
On the 6th December 2013 he requested a letter from GM for the Department of Social Protection. He did not return to work for the respondent.
The claimant gave evidence of loss.
When asked why he had asked for a letter from GM for the Department of Social Protection he replied that he knew GM would remove him from the roster for a number of weeks as he had declined to attend the Balbriggan site. When asked if he had contacted his union about his situation he replied that he had in the past to discuss his lack of shifts in the past. He had also contacted them to inform them he had left the respondent’s employment.
Determination:
The Tribunal are satisfied the respondent was properly notified of the time, date and location of this hearing. Neither the respondent nor a representative attended.
Based on the uncontested evidence the Tribunal finds the claimant was unfairly dismissed. Accordingly, the Tribunal awards the claimant the sum of €19,704.75, this being his full loss of earnings, under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal
This ________________________
(Sgd.) ________________________
(CHAIRMAN)