FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : GRANT THORNTON - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Ms O'Donnell Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Dismissal
BACKGROUND:
2. The case concerns a claim by the Claimant that she was unfairly dismissed.
The Employer's position is that while it accepts the Claimant was dismissed, it was on the basis that she had failed to satisfactorily perform during the probation period.
On the 4 July 2017 the Worker referred her dispute to the Labour Court 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 the 2 August 2017.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Claimant was appointed as a Senior Pensions Administrator on the 16 January 2017.
2. However, the tasks that she was given were for a junior role which she hadn’t done before and it took her time to get used to the role. She had meetings with her manager in March and April about her performance and felt she was improving.
3. However, she was called to a meeting in May and told she was being dismissed.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Under the contract of employment, signed and accepted by the Claimant, she accepted the right of the firm to terminate her employment within the probationary period.
2. The Claimant was provided with timely feedback throughout her probation
3. The Claimant failed to satisfactorily perform during the probation period.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has carefully considered the written and verbal submissions of the Parties.
The Court is satisfied on the evidence before it that the employer failed to adhere to the requirements of the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures made under section 42 of the Industrial Relations Act 1990, and contained in (S.I 146 of 2000), before the decision to dismiss the Claimant was taken. In reaching that conclusion the Court has had regard to the following: -
- While the Claimant was invited to attend a probation meeting on 12thMay 2017 the decision to dismiss had been taken prior to the meeting.
- The Claimant was not advised in advance that the purpose of the meeting was too affect her dismissal.
- The Claimant was not afforded an opportunity to be accompanied at the meeting.
- No appeal procedure was available to the Claimant in respect of the decision to dismiss her.
The Court notes that the Claimant’s contract of employment purported to provide that normal disciplinary procedures do not apply during the probationary period. However, this Court has consistently held that an employer is not relieved of the obligation to act fairly during a probationary period and that the requirement of the Code of Practice applies in all circumstances in which a worker is on hazard of having his or her employment terminated.
Having regard to all of these considerations the Court has concluded that Claimant was treated unfairly in the manner in which her employment was terminated.
The Court recommends that the employer pay the Claimant compensation in the amount of €1,500 in full and final settlement of the claim before the Court.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Louise O'Donnell
CR______________________
9th August, 2017Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.