EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
CLAIM(S) OF: ` CASE NO.
Catherine Murphy UD841/2013
Claimant
against
Independent News & Media
Respondent
under
UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2007
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Ms. V. Gates B.L.
Members: Mr. J. Horan
Mr T. Brady
heard this claim at Dublin on 4th June 2014
Representation:
Claimant(s): Ken Stafford, 7, Castletown Court, Celbridge, Co. Kildare
Respondent(s): Not Present or Represented
The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:-
Background:
The Claimant confirmed, in sworn evidence, that the details in respect of her claim contained in her Workplace Relations Form were correct and gave oral evidence in support thereof.
The Claimant was employed as a Journalist by the Respondent from the 31st August 2011 until dismissal on the 26th December 2012. The Claimant’s role was to write in-depth articles for the Respondent’s weekend magazine. A net weekly salary of €1,200 was agreed between the parties and a Contract of Employment was promised. A number of emails were sent by the Claimant to the Managing Editor requesting a written contract. She also spoke to Magazine Editor (YH) in relation to her promised contract of employment but was informed she should deal with the Managing Editor (MD).
In late 2012, a new Editor (SR) was appointed. Initially they was no problem with the type of articles submitted by the Claimant but in mid-October, she was informed that SR required more celebrity articles in the magazine and the Claimant duly furnished the same. The Claimant said that there were no issues in relation to her standard of work.
As time passed, the Claimant became increasingly anxious in relation to certain changes in the newspaper and discussed the issue with YH who informed her to simply continue to do what she was told.
On the 5th November 2012 the Claimant expected to return to work following a week’s paid holiday but was allocated no work. She spoke to YH who informed her there were to be cutbacks at the newspaper. YH asked the Claimant if she wished to speak to SR. The Claimant declined to do so and YH contacted her again having spoken to SR and informed her that the news was “not good” and her Contract was at an end.
The following day, the Claimant met with YH to discuss the matter further and was informed it was not the right time to negotiate her position and that cuts had to be made. A later email from MD welcomed the Claimant to furnish any articles for consideration. A further email dated 21st November 2012 from MD stated that the Claimant’s position was coming to an end and that she would receive her final pay cheque in the first week in January, 2013. The Claimant arranged a meeting with MD in early December, 2012 to re-negotiate her position but was informed he had “nothing to add”.
The Claimant gave detailed evidence of the mitigation of her loss since her dismissal.
Determination:
The Tribunal is satisfied the Respondent was properly notified of the date, time and location of the above named hearing. However, there was no appearance by the Respondent at the date of the hearing.
From the uncontested evidence given by the Claimant, it appears she was employed by an oral Contract and paid a net wage of €1,200 weekly into her Bank Account for a period of 15 months. No written Contract of Employment issued from the Respondent despite several requests on the Claimant’s part that one be drawn up.
The Tribunal finds the Claimant was unfairly dismissed. However, in mitigating her loss the Claimant confined her search for employment to her field of expertise only.
The Tribunal awards the sum of €55,000.00 under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal
This ________________________
(Sgd.) ________________________
(CHAIRMAN)