EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
CLAIMS OF: CASE NO.
Peter Burns UD1631/2013
- Claimant
Against
G4S Secure Solutions (Ire) Limited
- Respondent
under
UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2007
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Mr. P. O’Leary BL
Members: Mr. A. O’Mara
Mr. C. Ryan
heard this claim at Dublin on 12th January 2015
Representation:
Claimant: Mr. Michael McNamee BL instructed by:
Das Legal Expense Insurance Company Limited,
Europa House, Harcourt Centre, Harcourt House, Dublin 2
Respondent: Tim O’Connell, IBEC, Confederation House, 84-86, Lower Baggot Street,
Dublin 2
The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:
Background:
The respondent is a large company providing cash-in-transit, security and cleaning services to their clients. It has a staff over 3,500 employees.
The claimant was employed from the 20th March 2012 to the 30th September 2013 as the Head of Healthcare, on a yearly salary of €90,000 and the full use of a company car. The respondent states his employment was terminated for reasons of redundancy.
Respondent’s Position:
A Human Resources Director gave evidence. In 2011/2012 the respondent made a decision to enter the heathcare business, i.e. hospital cleaning contracts. The respondent company was already involved in this type of business in the United Kingdom.
The claimant was employed by another company when he was approached by members of management from the respondent company with the prospective of a position in a new role as Head of Healthcare. The key role of this position was to acquiring new hospital cleaning contracts. The witness explained that the claimant had been approached with this job offer as he had expertise in this field.
The claimant commenced employment in March 2012. However by March 2013 no new hospital contracts were in place. Management decided to review the strategy. In June 2013 a management decision was made to terminate the claimant’s contract. He was informed in July 2013 and given three months notice, which he worked. His employment terminated on the 30th September 2013.
On cross-examination the witness stated that he had no act or part in the claimant’s recruitment of termination.
Claimant’s Position:
The claimant gave evidence.
He explained that he had been employed with another company when he was approached by the respondent with an offer of a sales position in late 2011 /early 2012. He declined the offer as, he explained, this was not his area of expertise. He was again approached by the respondent in February 2012 with the offer of the role of Head of Healthcare. He accepted the role and commenced employment. However it soon became apparent there was no operational role for him, it was more of a sales role.
In March 2013 he attended a sales meeting with the Managing Director and the, then, Human Resources Director. (Neither person were present on the day of the hearing to give sworn evidence to the Tribunal in this case). The claimant stated that he felt it was “just another meeting”. As he left the meeting the Managing Director mentioned that they would have to review the strategy in July.
On the 1st July 213 he attended a meeting and was handed a letter to inform him his contract was being terminated. He was given three months notice, of which he was required to work. He was very surprised as he had no prior knowledge of his termination. The following day he received an email from management requesting he “keep his notice period totally confidential”. He felt that because of this request he could not use this notice period to look for alternative employment.
During this time he made several attempts to contact management to discuss his position and was willing to take a decrease in salary. He met with the, then, Human Resources Director to discuss possible options including a position that was being advertised by the respondent as a Senior Business Development Manager.
His employment terminated o the 30th September 2013.
The claimant gave evidence of his loss of earnings. He obtained full time employment four months after his dismissal, albeit at a reduced salary, and had carried some consultancy work during this time.
Determination:
The onus of proof is on the respondent to establish dismissal is fair in all the circumstances. The respondent produced no evidence to substantiate a fair dismissal in this case.
The Tribunal heard evidence from the claimant regarding the facts and loss.
In the circumstances the Tribunal finds the claimant was dismissed unfairly and awards the sum of €45,000.00 under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal
This ________________________
(Sgd.) ________________________
(CHAIRMAN)