ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00000260

Complaint(s)/Dispute(s) for Resolution:

Act	Complaint/Dispute Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts	CA-00000375-001	22/10/2015
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994	CA-00000375-002	22/10/2015
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 11 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973	CA-00000375-003	22/10/2015

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 20/05/2016

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marguerite Buckley

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).

Complainant’s Submission and Presentation:

The Complainant was employed by the Respondent on the 1^st of December 2014 and employed to work as a cleaner under their contract with a regional hospital.

The Complainant worked a 39 hour week and received a gross weekly wage of €337.00.

On the 23^rd of September 2015 the Complainant received a phone call from the Respondent’s secretary requesting him to attend the Respondent’s premises the following day.

The Complainant did so.

In front of two co-employees the Respondent accused the Complainant of not filling in his Garda vetting form or notifying them of a previous conviction. The Respondent also alleged that this previous criminal conviction did not permit the Complainant to work as an employee for the Respondent or with the regional hospital as it was in breach of the “Respondent’s policy” and that of the institution that ran the regional hospital.

The Respondent advised the Complainant that he was being “let go” due to this non-disclosure.

The Respondent failed to put in writing the reasons for the termination of the Complainant’s employment.

The Complainant gave evidence that he had submitted a completed Garda vetting form to the Respondent when he began work. His criminal conviction was that of being drunk and disorderly.

The Complainant’s case was that the summary dismissal was unfair and in breach of fair procedures and natural justice. The provisions of SI 146 of 2000 were not applied.

The Complainant did not receive his statutory minimum notice on termination of his employment or payment in lieu thereof. As he was in employment for more than 13 weeks he was entitled to one weeks’ notice.

The Complainant did not receive a statement in writing from the Respondent under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994.

Respondent’s Submission and Presentation:

None. There was no attendance for the Respondent.

Decision:

Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

As the respondent did not attend the hearing I can only make my decision based on the Complainant’s submissions, both written and oral. I am satisfied that the Respondent was informed of the hearing date.

The Respondent failed to adhere to the requirements of the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary procedures contained in SI 146 of 2000. The Respondent summarily dismissed the Complainant without giving him the benefit of a disciplinary hearing. The Respondent is obliged to act fairly in any disciplinary decisions and the Code of Practice applies in all circumstances in which a Complainant is at risk of having their employment terminated.

Evidence was given that the Complainant has applied for a number of roles and subject to successful completion of his application will hopefully be engaged with a different employer in the regional hospital as a multitask attendant.

I am not fully satisfied that the Complainant has done everything possible to mitigate his loss however I do accept that there has been a substantial period of loss of earnings for him.

For his Unfair Dismissal, I find that the Complainant’s case is well founded and I recommend that the Respondent pay to the Complainant the sum of €5,500.00.

For the failure to pay notice, I award the sum of one week which is €337.00 gross.

For the failure to provide written terms of employment under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994 I award the Complainant the sum of €1,000.00.

Dated: 18^th August 2016