FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : TEACH NA NDAOINE FAMILY RESOURCE CENTRE REPRESENTED BY LAUREN TENNYSON B.L. INSTRUCTED BY BARRY HEALY AND CO SOLICITORS - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY MANDATE) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Unfair dismissal
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a claim by the worker that she was unfairly dismissed by her employer. The Union contends that the worker was dismissed without explanation for allegedly failing to carry out a legitimate management instruction yet it unsuccessfully sought a meeting with the employer in relation to the disciplinary process. The Union further contends that the ultimate dismissal of the worker was unfair as it did not comply with the provisions of the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures (S.I.146 of 2000) Management accepts that not all procedures were followed to the letter but it refutes that the dismissal was unfair.
The worker referred the matter to the Labour Court on 14th April 2015 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 21st May 2015.
UNION'S ARGUMENT:
3 1 The worker was unfairly dismissed. She was subject to a disciplinary process which did not follow the principles of fair procedures and natural justice. The Union is seeking that the worker be compensated for the manner which she was treated by her employer.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENT:
4 1 The employer contends that the workers dismissal was not unfair. She was disciplined and ultimately dismissed for failing to carry out a legitimate instruction of management.
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 submitted that she was unfairly dismissed when her employment terminated on 23rdFebruary 2015 without any explanation.
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court is not satisfied that the manner of the Claimant’s dismissal met the standard of fairness and good practice. The Court finds that the dismissal was contrary to the provisions of the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedure (S.I. No. 146 of 2000). That Code of Practice is made pursuant to Section 42 of the Industrial Relations Act 1990 and the Court is required by Section 42(4) of that Act to have regard to its provisions in deciding on any case to which it relates. For all of these reasons the Court finds that the dismissal of the Claimant was unfair.
In all the circumstances, the Court awards the Claimant the sum of €2,000 compensation for the manner of her dismissal. This sum is inclusive of an outstanding entitlement to 10 days' annual leave. The Court recommends that the monies should be paid by the employer within six weeks of this Recommendation and should be accepted by the Claimant in full and final settlement of all matters before the Court.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
5th June 2015______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.