ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00006465
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Retail Assistant | Retail Store |
Representatives | Hugh Mccabe Hugh McCabe Solicitors | Michelle Ni Longain Byrne Wallace Solicitors |
Complaint(s):
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-00008882-001 | 21/12/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00008882-002 | 21/12/2016 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 12/07/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: John Tierney
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 [ and/or Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015] 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).
Background:
The Claimant is claiming unfair dismissal due to illness. It was accepted that the complaint would be heard under the Unfair Dismissals Act. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent outlined in detail their interaction with the Claimant due to absence from work due to illness. They refute as entirely incorrect the claimant’s statement in the complaint form that he was dismissed because he was suffering from an illness. The Respondent held regular meetings with him from the time he initially went on sick leave on 2 July 2015 to his dismissal over one year later. The Respondent notes the lack of progress made by him in the context of his medical condition which rendered him unfit for work. They submit that they gave him as much time as it could afford to give to have him return to work but that the position became untenable when over one year since commencing long term absence, neither the Claimant nor his doctor was in a position to give the Respondent a return date to work. The Respondent submits that it took an adequate assessment of the Claimant’s position and took the view that no amount of reasonable accommodation could enable the Claimant to return to work given the serious and highly limiting nature of his illness. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The claimant claimed that his dismissal letter was posted on 10 July 2016 prior to a meeting on 12 July 2016. The fact that meeting was adjourned and when it resumed it was turned into a disciplinary hearing was not a fair hearing. Furthermore, the Claimant received a letter on 5 July 2016 threating him with dismissal. Therefore, the dismissal procedures are flawed as per the Respondent’s Handbook. |
Decision:
Section 41 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 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 have considered the submissions and evidence presented by both parties. In regard to the letter of dismissal, the post mark in so indistinct that it could also be read as 18 July 2016. The Claimant also received a letter dated 5 July before his meeting of 12 July stating Should your position remain the same and you still cannot provide us with any indication of a return to work date, I may be left with no alternative but to terminate your contract. Therefore, the Claimant was made aware of his situation before the meeting. From evidence presented the Claimant did not stay in regular contact with the Respondent and did not submit weekly sick certificates as required. It was reasonable for the Respondent to conclude that he did not intend to return to full time work The Respondent did not dismiss him until over a year had passed on long term sick leave, I therefore accept that the they behaved in a reasonable manner. I do not find the dismissal to be unfair and the claim fails. |
Dated: 9th May 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: John Tierney
Key Words:
Dismissal |