Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Travel Agent

Travel Company

Representatives

  The claimant represented herself

 Shane McDermott ,Solicitor

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 11 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

CA-00025131-001

20/01/2019

The claimant was employed as a Travel Agent with the respondent from the 15.10.2015 to the 10.12.2018.Th claimant submitted the respondent was in breach of the Act for failing to pay her her statutory minimum notice on termination of her employment on the 10^th.Dec. 2018.She submitted that while her contract of employment provided for 8  weeks  notice she sought the payment of 4 weeks  at a meeting with the respondent  on the 10^th.December  - this was to enable her to take up a position with her new employer at the beginning of Jan. 2019 .The claimant stated that she had not signed her contract as she did not agree with the pay provisions contained therein. The claimant submitted that when she put forward the 4 week notice proposal at the meeting  her employment was terminated. She submitted that the manager told the claimant that as she took the decision to leave they were not required to pay her notice .She submitted that the respondent ended her contract because “ I didn’t respect the terms of my contract”.

The claimant set out a chronology of her employment with the company since commencement and stated that she was unhappy with her wages as they did not recognise the additional responsibilities she had taken on over the years .She was particularly aggrieved that 2 new employees  were taken on and paid more than her. She submitted that her contracts were renewed annually and in 2018  she received 2 versions of the same contract without reference to pay.T he claimant was offered a job in Dublin on the 7^th.December  and decided to hand in her notice on the 10^th.Dec. 2018.The commencement date for her new job was the 7^th.Jan. 2019 and consequently she requested 4 weeks notice instead of the 8 weeks referred to in her contract of employment. The manager advised the claimant on the 10^th.Dec. 2018 that she needed to give 8 weeks notice as provided for in her contract .She replied that she had not signed the contract and accordingly did not agree to the terms outlined. She asserted that the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 19973 provided that she was entitled to give the minimum of 2 weeks notice. The claimant submitted that when she disclosed the details of her new employer , the managers were unhappy and the meeting turned sour. She submitted that the managers questioned her integrity an ability to do her job. The claimant submitted that the manager informed her after the meeting that if she wanted to leave the company on that day she could – the claimant did not want to leave and wanted to work her notice of 4 weeks. The claimant submitted that the respondent had breached the provisions of Schedule 2 and Section 7(2) of the Act. The employer confirmed by email that they did not accept the request for 4 weeks’ notice as she was in breach of her contract and asked that she not return to the company as of the 10^th.Dec.2018.The claimant submitted that she was not guilty of any of the provisions of par 19 of her contract which referred to the enforcement of immediate termination of her employment. The claimant submitted that if she had been allowed to work her notice she could have trained in her replacement.

The claimant stated that she did not have an opportunity to tell her new employer of her obligation to give 8 weeks notice because when she discussed it with her manager she was asked to leave .The claimant asserted that some of her colleagues had only given the company 3 weeks notice and she was prepared to give 4 weeks. The claimant submitted that she did not want to say that she had been fired .

The respondent denied any breach of the Act  and submitted that the 4 weeks notice proposed by the claimant was unacceptable for business and human  resources reasons.It was submitted that her actions in seeking to leave at one of the busiest times of the year presented the company with enormous difficulties  not least in sourcing a replacement for her. It was submitted that the respondent was entitled to rescind the contract and that a reasonable person would have sought a start date in early February 2019 but the claimant failed to do so. The claimant had attended a Team Building Training Session in early December 2018 and had given no indication of her intention to leave. It was decided that given the claimant’s breach of the terms of her contract which provided for 8 weeks’ notice, it was not in the best interests of the company to continue the claimant in employment for a further 4 weeks. It was submitted that the contract was binding on both parties and the claimant failed to provide adequate notice with the resultant challenges for the company if sourcing a replacement for her. It was accepted that the claimant was asked to leave on the 10^th.Dec. 2018.

 I have reviewed the evidence presented at the hearing and noted the respective positions of the parties. I note in particular that the complaint has been referred under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973 and that accordingly my jurisdiction is confined to determining if the respondent was in breach of  said statutory provisions. Having considered the entirety of the evidence I have concluded that the respondent was in breach of the Act  when they terminated the claimant’s employment on the 10^th.Dec. 2018 , without notice .I require the respondent to pay the claimant her statutory entitlement to 2 weeks’ notice.