ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00010245

Parties:

Complaint(s):

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 20/03/2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim O'Connell

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint

Background

The claimant was employed by as a security officer from the 9th March 2014 to the 12th March 2017. He worked 20 hours per week and he was paid €240 per week.

The respondent submitted that the claimant failed to turn up for work on the 31st December 2016, attempts were made to contact him on the 31st December 4th January and 7th January 2017

On the 15th January 2017 the claimant, while off duty the claimant attended a premise which was a client of the respondent. During the evening the claimant became very intoxicated and in the early hours of the following morning 16th January allegedly argued with the bar owner (client) of the respondents and where he had to be removed from the premises.

The claimant shouted abuse as he passed other client's premises. The claimant was asked to move on by the Gardaí, however, they returned to the scene and where they have a further word with him. On the 27th January 2017, the respondent sent a letter to the claimant requiring him to attend an investigation meeting on the 31st January at 3 pm. A list of allegations was put to him and the claimant submitted that he was not on duty at the time and these matters were irrelevant in the circumstances.

The respondent's clients advised them that the claimant was not permitted to work on their sites any further. Despite the respondent’s best efforts, they could not find work for him. He was invited. and failed to attend a disciplinary meeting on the 2nd March 2017.

The respondent submitted that because of the claimant's own behaviour they were unable to find work for him within their remit and they had no other alternative but to terminate his employment. The claimant also failed to follow the respondent's procedures. It is the respondent view that the dismissal was justified.

The claimant representative submitted that fair procedures were not applied and that the claimant was on his own time when the alleged incidents took place.

Findings

I find that the claimant had a contract of employment and he failed to fully utilize the procedures contained therein prior to referring his complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission.

I find that the position the claimant held as a security officer that it was incumbent on him to be conscious of this fact when he socialised in these premises on his time off. I find the claimant’s own behaviour let to the respondent's clients, not permitting him to work on their sites any further. I find that the respondent made all reasonable attempts to find alternative employment for him without success.

In all circumstances, I find that the claimant contributed to this situation by his own behaviour

Decision:

Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 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 find the claim for Unfair dismissal fails and I uphold the respondent's position.

Dated:   10.8.18

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim O'Connell

Key Words: