ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00004153
Complaint(s)/Dispute(s) for Resolution:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00006067-001 | 20/07/2016 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 09/11/2016
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: John Tierney
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 [and/or Section 8(1B) of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977, and/or Section 9 of the Protection of Employees (Employers’ Insolvency) Act, 1984, and/or Section 79 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998, and/or Section 25 of the Equal Status Act, 2000] 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 Claimant is claiming that he was unfairly dismissed from his employment. He outlined the events that led to his employment being terminated due to absenteeism and the reasons that caused it. He suffered from anxiety and depression. The company doctor put him on medication to deal with this but it did not help him.
He was also transfer from various delivery offices which did not assist him in dealing his situation. He believed that if he was given a second chance he would be able to improve his performance. |
Respondent’s Submission and Presentation:
The Claimant had a very bad attendance record. Even by his own account it was ‘atrocious’. Between April 2011 and June 2016 he was absent for a total of 269.5 Days. The Respondent outlined the procedures used to deal with the claimant’s absenteeism including a referral to the company’s occupational health advisor. The Claimant’s absenteeism did not improve. All procedures including an appeal were exhausted before his employment was terminated. Supporting documentation was provided to the Hearing.
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.
[Section 8(1B) of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 requires that I make a decision in relation to the unfair dismissal claim consisting of a grant of redress in accordance with section 7 of the 1977 Act.
I have considered the submissions of both parties. The Claimant’s absenteeism was a serious problem for the Respondent. They used proper procedures and due process in dealing with him in regard to this matter. In the end they were left with no alternative but to terminate his employment.
I therefore find the dismissal fair and reasonable in the circumstance.
I do not find the claim well founded and it fails.
Dated: 14th March 2017