Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A Quantity Surveyor

A Limited Company

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-00019000-001

07/05/2018

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts

CA-00019000-002

07/05/2018

The complainant states that he is looking for compensation for being unfairly dismissed by the respondent. He is also looking for a reference from the respondent and an apology.

The complainant made submissions in relation to the data protection act but when asked what the relevance was to this claim, he stated that he merely wanted to make reference to that act for no other reason other than to refer to it.

The complainant stated that he wished to get a reference from the responded but they refuse to give him one. However, when pressed by the adjudication officer he admitted that he had not in fact asked for one stating that if they had wanted to give him one, they would have done it.

The complainant stated that he was never given a contract of employment or the company's employees handbook. When shown the contract submitted by the respondent he conceded that he had been given it.

The complainant denies the allegations that were made against him in relation to the events that took place on the 7th of December. He places the blame solely on the director of the company and states that it was not him who was problematic on that occasion but the director.

The complainant states that despite the company holding a purported investigation he was not asked for a statement in relation to his version of the events nor was he interviewed by anybody. He requested an appeal from the company's decision to dismiss him and that request was ignored. It is in those circumstances that the complainant is looking for compensation.

The complaint denied having any hardware or files of the respondents in his possession. Following questioning, he admitted to having a memory stick into which he had downloaded various confidential documents belonging to the respondent.

The complainant was employed by the respondent from the 8th of August 2017 to the 20th of December 2017. The complainant does not have the service necessary to bring a claim pursuant to the Unfair Dismissal Acts.

The letter of termination, dated the 14th of December 2015 states:

“The company has concluded its internal review of your general behaviour and actions towards other members of staff last Thursday’s social event and your subsequent actions and correspondence to the company since Friday morning. The company considers that your said behaviour and actions amount to gross misconduct and hereby informs you of the company's decision to terminate your employment with immediate effect. If you wish to appeal this decision please notify X in writing within 14 days. Please return your keys to the company's premises immediately, together with all company property in your possession and control, including the laptop and mobile telephone handset. Finally, it has come to our attention since Friday morning that you have removed and retained without any authority important company documentation files and correspondence both in electronic format from our servers and file-sharing systems and in hard copy. This is a matter of the utmost seriousness and you are no doubt fully aware of the significance of the information you have taken and the material consequences that it's movie will have on the company's business we require all of our information documentation and Property to be returned to the company immediately and should you fail to do so the company should have no option but to take all necessary action against you to recover same”

On the 3rd of January 2018 the complainant sent a letter to the respondent however the content of same was very unclear and rambling in nature. He did not specify that he wish to Appeal the decision. That correspondence was not addressed to x as per the letter of the 14th December. The complainant then sent another email later that day stating that he did wished to appeal. The respondent due to the initial correspondence did not take the complainant’s request seriously.

The respondent carried out an initial review of the complainant’s behaviour on the night in question. They also considered a letter from another employee of a sister company which set out her version of the events. Following a preliminary review of the events the complainant was suspended on full pay. Three directors of the respondent company then reviewed all of the evidence in relation to the matter and following that, they deemed that the complainant’s behaviour amounted to gross misconduct and he was dismissed with immediate effect.

The respondent has written to the complainant on numerous occasions trying to get the complainant to return various items that he has in his possession belonging to the respondent. Specifically, the complainant has a company laptop, the company keys, hard copy files in relation to the respondents business, the company's Samsung Galaxy handset. Furthermore, it has also come to the company's attention that one of the director’s photograph is being used as the complainant's profile picture on a social media platform. The complainant has attempted to frustrate the respondent’s efforts to have the various items returned. On one occasion he told them that he had moved address when in fact he had not. The complainant also admitted during the hearing that he has downloaded confidential information from the respondent’s servers onto a memory stick which he still has in his possession. Confidential information which is not relevant to this particular claim has been forwarded to the WRC by the complainant which could only have been taken off the respondent’s systems.

The Respondent’s requests that any recommendation made should include the return of these items to the respondent either directly or through their solicitors.

CA 19000-001

Unfair Dismissals Act.

2. (1) This Act shall not apply in relation to any of the following persons:

(a) an employee (other than a person referred to in section 4 of this Act) who is dismissed, who, at the date of his dismissal, had less than one year's continuous service with the employer who dismissed him and whose dismissal does not result wholly or mainly from the matters referred to in section 6 (2) (f) of this Act.

The complainant commenced his employment on the 08/08/2017. His employment was terminated by letter dated the 14/12/2017 on the 20/12/2017. In those circumstances pursuant to Section 2(1) I do not have jurisdiction to hear the matter.

CA 19000-002

Industrial Relations Act.

Having considered the evidence of both parties, together with the submissions filed, I make the following recommendations:

The Respondent:

1.       The respondent should furnish the complainant with a reference.

2.       The respondent should review its investigation/disciplinary procedures.

The Complainant:

1.       The complainant returns to the respondent the following items:

-          Company Laptop.

-          Keys

-          Company Files either in hard copy or digital form.

-          Samsung Galaxy handset.

-          Memory Stick containing any company information.

-          Remove the directors photograph from his profile picture on all social media / networking / correspondence platforms.

I recommend that the above items be returned to the respondent either directly or via their legal representatives within 7 days from the date of this recommendation.

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.

CA 19000-001 - The claim fails.

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.

CA 19000-002 - I make the following recommendations:

The Respondent:

1.            The respondent should furnish the complainant with a reference.

2.            The respondent should review its investigation/disciplinary procedures.

The Complainant:

1.            The complainant returns to the respondent the following items:

-              Company Laptop.

-              Keys

-              Company Files either in hard copy or digital form.

-              Samsung Galaxy handset.

-              Memory Stick containing any company information.

-              Remove the directors photograph from his profile picture on all social media / networking /     correspondence platforms.

I recommend that the above items be returned to the respondent either directly or via their legal representatives within 7 days from the date of this recommendation.