Representatives

Margaret Feeney Francis X. Burke & Co. Michael Timmins BL

David Walsh

David R. Walsh

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-00011453-001

19/05/2017

The complainant commenced his employment with the respondent on the 15.07.2015. After a period of six or seven months it became apparent that he was not a long term fit for the company. The respondent company secretary had a meeting with the complainant on the 10.06.2016. The purpose of the meeting was to inform him that the respondent had decided to terminate his contract of employment and give him notice of three months under the terms of his contract.

The complainant had a meeting with the respondent company director on the 08.07.2016. He was offered an alternative position within the respondent entity. He stated that he would not be interested in that position. In September, the company director had a conversation with the complainant. He informed him that he had not secured employment elsewhere. It was then decided to offer him a three month, contract. They discussed the terms of that new three month contract. The complainant stated that he wanted his pay structure to be in line with his previous contract. This was agreed between the parties. A contract was drawn up. It commenced on the 01.10.2016 and was for a period of three months. The contract was not signed by either party. On the 11.10.2016 the complainant e-mailed the respondent stating “I look forward to working to the original agreement re the bonus”

On the 25th November, 2016 a second meeting was had with the company secretary. The complainant informed the respondent that he had not secure alternative employment. The complainant’s holiday entitlements were discussed. The complainant had two week’s holidays due to him. Given that the time of year, from a sales point of view, was almost over and there was only five weeks to year end it was agreed that he could remain on for the five weeks but would not be in the office. He would have to be available on the other end of a phone when needed. He was also to use that time to secure alternative employment. The complainant stated that he would have to come in to remove some personal files off his work PC. The respondent reminded him that he should not have personal files on his work PC and took great exception to this. The respondent insisted that he remove the personal files immediately and leave the office thereafter.

The complainant was given amble notice that his employment was coming to an end.

The respondent accepts that it did delay the process of terminating the complainant’s employment. This was due to the fact that the director was seriously ill at the time.

The complainant stated that he commenced his employment with the respondent in July 2015. In June, 2016 he was called to a meeting in a hotel with the company secretary. He was told that it was not working out and he was going to be dismissed. He was given three months, notice in line with his contract. He was offered an alternative positon. He thought about it. He -emailed the respondent after that meeting stating

“ I will consider your offer made today”.

He went on holidays. In early August, during a conversation with the respondent he informed them that he had not secured alternative employment. The respondent said that he could continue on as normal. He felt that everything was fine and that his employment with the respondent was once again secure. On the 25.11.2016 he had a meeting with the respondent. He was again told that it was not working out and that he would have to pack up his things and leave that day. He went back to the office, removed his personal family photos off his PC and left.

The complainant denied being given a three month contract. He stated that the respondent asked him to draw up a contract on the same terms and conditions as his previous contract.

The complainant secured employment on the 28.02.2017. His salary his more than his salary with the respondent.  

I am satisfied that the complainant was put on notice in June, 2016 that his contract of employment was being terminated and that he was given notice of three months in line with the terms and conditions of his employment. I find the complainant’s evidence that there was no discussion with the respondent in relation to the three month, fixed term contract to be disingenuous. There are e-mails from both the complainant and the respondent which corroborate the respondent’s version of events. Furthermore, the complainant stated in his evidence that he was asked to draft up a contract, albeit not a fixed term contract of three months duration. The complainant could not have thought that everything was fine. He had meetings with the respondents in June, July and October, November. All of the meetings were to discuss his future, or lack thereof with the respondent company.

I am satisfied that the complainant from October, 2016, continued on, with the respondent on a three month, fixed term contract. However, I accept that that contract was not signed by the parties.

The complainant lodged his claim with the Workplace Commission in relation to his Unfair Dismissal claim on the 19th May, 2017. The complainant was finally dismissed from his employment of the 25th November, 2016. The fact that he was allegedly on a three months fix term contract does not alter the termination date. As the complaint was filed within the 6 months time frame allowed by the Act, I find that I do have jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

I find that the respondent failed to adopt any formal procedures in relation to the complainant’s dismissal. On one hand they stated that the complainant wasn’t working out but then on the other, offered him an alleged three months fixed term contract. That contract was not signed, nor was the complainant allowed to work the full term of the alleged contract. In the end he was simply asked to pack his things and leave. He was not given a right of appeal. I find also that the complainant played a significant role in his own dismissal. He accepted that his skill set wasn’t what was required for the role.

The complainant found new employment on the 28.02.2017. His current salary exceeds his salary with the respondent.

In all of the circumstances I award the complainant €2,500.00.