FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : PREPAY POWER - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Haugh Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Ms Treacy |
1. Dismissal
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a claim by the Worker for reinstatement.
On the 1 August 2018, the Worker referred the dispute to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 3 October 2018. The Employer did not attend the hearing.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Worker started with the Company in April 2018.
2. He was given two weeks training, two days in the head office and then in the field.
3. He received a phone call and was told his services were no longer required. He was given no reason for his dismissal.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Dispute
The Worker was employed by PrePay Power Limited (‘the Company’) as a Field Sales Representative pursuant to a contract of employment dated 23 April 2018. His basic salary was €21,000.00 per annum and he was also entitled to commission of €25.00 per 5 sales achieved. HIs contract provided for a probationary period of six months.
The Worker’s employment commenced with a two-week training and induction programme, the first two days of which he spent at the Company’s head office in Sandyford, Co. Dublin. Thereafter, the Worker was working in the field in the north-west of the country under the direction of a Field Sales Manager until his employment was terminated without notice and by telephone on the Thursday of his second week of training.
Recommendation
The Company did not attend at the within hearing to defend the claim. The Court, therefore, relies on the Worker’s uncontested version of events and, in particular his account of the manner in which his employment was abruptly terminated without any prior warning or notice.
The Court recommends that the Company pay the Worker €650.00 being the equivalent of two weeks’ gross basic pay in compensation for its failure to observe fair procedures when summarily dismissing him during his probationary period.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
CR______________________
12 November, 2018Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.