ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00013297
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Shop Worker | A Retail Chain |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts | CA-00017331-001 | 01/02/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 07/01/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Procedure:
In accordance Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969following 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).
Opening Note:
There was a difference of opinion with the Adjudication Officer regarding whether or not this claim had been properly served on the Respondent and as a result whether or not a Formal Objection to a Hearing by an Adjudication officer under the Industrial Relations Act,1969, had been properly lodged within the required time limits.
Having reviewed the file and the considerable correspondence that arose with the Respondent Legal Representatives I was of the opinion that the Claim had been properly served and that the Objection received was outside time limits.
On this basis I proceeded to hold a Hearing on the 7th Janaury 2019.
Background:
The issues in contention concern a claim of Constructive Dismissal by a Shop Worker against a Retail Chain. |
1: Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant commenced employment in a West Dublin Branch of the Respondent Chain on the 17th October 2017 and left on the 8th November 2017. During this time his relationship with his Manager and supervisors was difficult. In particular he was subject to alleged upsetting treatment regarding his toilet breaks and the duration of same. An issue arose in November over his alleged failure to pay for an item (a bakery item that was at its sell by date) he had purchased for his lunch. He was effectively accused of Theft. No procedures of any description were followed, and he was just taken off the Staff roster and told not to come back. The Complainant alleged that other members of staff were treated completely differently particularly when the Store Managers were disposing of Sell by Date items. Considerable latitude was extended to other staff regarding payment for these items. He was not afforded the same latitude. His treatment in this case was effectively Racist due to his skin colour and defamatory of his good name. The Complaint gave oral evidence to the Adjudication Officer and answered questions put to him. |
2: Summary of Respondent’s Case:
As stated in the Procedure Section the Respondent indicated that they would not participate in the Oral Hearing. It was their view that a valid objection had been lodged in time when they became aware of the claim. The original claim had not been, in their view, properly served on them in the first instance. |
3: Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant had served only a very brief period in the Respondent Store concerned. He came across at the Oral Hearing as quite genuine and clearly was upset with the alleged racist attitude of his former Manager. Many of his allegations regarding the cash sale or otherwise of items that were at sell by dates I could not form an opinion on. Likewise, his allegations of Racist behaviour by local Mangers I could not form an opinion on as they were effectively his word only. His exit from the Store appeared to have been quite peremptory and without any formalities, correspondence etc. Nothing was in writing that I could see. On this latter ground of Procedural Irregularity, I find that he had reasonable grounds for an Unfair Dismissal claim and I find in his favour on this point. In view of is extremely short service I recommend an award of €500 as being “just and equitable” in his favour. Taxation of the Recommendation to be considered in conjunction with the Revenue Commissioners. |
4: Recommendation
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Summary Recommendation |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts | CA-00017331-001 | Claim for Constructive Dismissal is well founded. Redress of €500 is Recommended. |
Dated: 15th February 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee