UD1761/2014

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CASE NO.

UD1761/2014

CLAIM OF:                                                          

Gary Doherty               

Against

Mr Tom McGuinness T/A The Betting Lounge

under

UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS 1977 TO 2007

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:        Dr. A. Courell B.L.

Members:        Mr. D. Morrison

                        Ms. R. Kerrigan

heard this claim at Letterkenny on 29^th August 2016 and 30^th January 2017

Representation:

Claimant:         Mr. Kieran O'Gorman, Kieran O'Gorman, 62 Upper Main Street, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal

Respondent:    Mr. Gordon Curley, O’Gorman Cunningham & Co., Solicitors, 16 Upper Main Street, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal

Dismissal was in dispute in this case.

Claimant’s Case:

The claimant was employed in the respondent’s turf accountants located in Ballybofey from February 2012. The respondent also ran another shop in Clonmel, Co. Tipperary. The claimant told the Tribunal that there were no issues until 2014 when it appeared the Clonmel shop was not doing well and appeared to be losing money. Monies were moved from the Ballybofey premises to the Clonmel premises. The claimant discussed the issue with the respondent.

On the 16^th of August 2014 the respondent rang the claimant at home and informed him he had assessed the situation and was putting no more money into the business.

The respondent advised him that if an offer of another job arose he, the claimant, should take it. The claimant spoke to a female colleague about the issue and was told that the respondent had said the same to her.

On the 24^th of August 2014 the respondent called to the shop, he appeared on edge. The respondent produced a contract of employment and asked the claimant to sign it. This was around ten minutes to closing. The claimant asked the respondent to take the contract away so he could look through it. The respondent agreed and told the claimant to take the next two days off as he was going to run the shop himself to “get a feel for it”.

The claimant explained to the Tribunal that the start date on the contract was the 1^st of January 2014 and the name of the respondent was different. The following day the claimant attended a solicitor who advised him not to sign the contract but to request a proper one.

On the 27^th of August 2014 the claimant returned to work. On his arrival the respondent asked him had he signed the contract of employment. The claimant replied no and told the respondent he had obtained legal advice. The issue of redundancy was also discussed. The respondent told the claimant it was “okay”, that he had “money set aside for it”. The respondent then told the claimant that if he did not sign the contract he would have no job. The respondent said he had “got a feel” for the business and said he was going to work there himself. The respondent also told the claimant that he could not let his colleague go as she was “a local”. The claimant asked if was he being let go, the respondent told him he would give him €2,000, the claimant declined the offer.

The claimant told the Tribunal that two days previous to this conversation it had been brought to his attention that the respondent had not been paying his PRSI contributions.

On the 28^th of August 2014 the claimant again attended his solicitor with his father. The following day he went to the respondent’s shop and told the respondent what his solicitor had advised and what his entitlement were. The respondent replied that they “didn’t need him” before asking him to leave the premises. The claimant told the Tribunal he tried to contact the respondent on a number of occasions but the respondent would not engage.

On the 11^th of September 2014 the claimant attended the betting shop to deliver some stationery on behalf of a friend. He delivered one box but as he tried to enter the shop a second time the door was locked. He was informed by his colleague that the respondent did not want him on the premises.

On the second day of hearing the respondent conceded the substantive issue of the unfair dismissal and the Tribunal heard evidence of loss.

Determination:

The claim under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2007 succeeds. The Tribunal considered the evidence given and the efforts made by the claimant to mitigate his loss and notes the time that the claimant spent on illness benefit.

The Tribunal consider that compensation in the sum of €2,170.00 is fair and equitable, taking into account his financial loss.

Sealed with the Seal of the

Employment Appeals Tribunal

This   ________________________

(Sgd.) ________________________

     (CHAIRMAN)