ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00011355
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts | CA-00015134-001 | 19/10/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 16/05/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim Dolan
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and/or Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969 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 Complainant was employed by the Respondent as a Supervisor from 17/02/2017 to 02/06/2017. The work entailed the installation of fibre optic cable for broadband purposes. The Complainant alleges that he was dismissed for highlighting some health and safety deficiencies in the Respondents operation. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
I was insisting that health and safety procedures should be followed as laid out in expert health and safety booklets. Over the course of the project I was involved in daily arguments with my line manager in relation to correct health and safety procedures and the correct installation methods for fibre optic cables. The Complainant informed the hearing that he was wrongly accused of stealing and that his line manager informed him that he was “sick and tired of you whinging” when he would raise a concern in relation to health and safety and/or the standard of the work being completed. After being dismissed the Complainant was unemployed for two / three weeks.
|
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent was notified of the hearing arrangements by letter dated 17th April 2018. On 04/12/2017 the Respondent informed the Workplace Relations Commission that they had no objection to the complaint being investigated by an Adjudication Officer. The Respondent has offered no explanation regarding their non-attendance at the hearing on 16th May 2018. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant went into some detail in explaining what he had experienced in his brief employment with the Respondent. Not being technically minded I asked him to explain this to me in simple non-technical language, I found him to be very credible. I have no alternative but to accept his version of events. |
Decision:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
Based on the version of events presented by the Complainant I accept that he was unfairly dismissed and recommend a compensation payment of four weeks’ pay i.e. €3,591.12. The above mentioned payment should be made to the Complainant within 42 days from the date of this Recommendation. |
Dated:
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim Dolan