LCR22119

The Court has given careful consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties.

The Claimant worked with the Employer for approximately three weeks. He commenced employment on 1^stApril 2019 and his contract stipulated that he would undergo a six-month period of probation. He commenced training on the 1^stApril. The training programme culminated in a demonstration.

The Employer judged that the Claimant failed at the demonstration to demonstrate the standard required to remain in employment. The Employer submitted that the claimant was aware that his continuing employment depended on satisfactory performance and that his failure on the demonstration amounted to poor work performance which was cited in his contract as an instance in which the Claimant could be dismissed.

The Claimant submitted that he disagreed with the Employer’s assessment of his performance at the demonstration. He also submitted that he was unaware that his continuing employment depended on satisfactory performance at the demonstration and that he could lose his job if he did not meet the standard required by the Employer.

The Court established at its hearing that the Claimant was dismissed by a trainer at the demonstration. The Court was not provided with a letter of dismissal albeit the Employer submitted that one existed.

The Court was not provided with any basis for finding that, upon his termination by his Employer, the Claimant was aware that he could appeal that decision and if there was an avenue of appeal how that appeal should be made. The Employer submitted that such details were contained in the Employee handbook. The Court was not provided with a copy of that handbook.

In all of the circumstances and on the basis of the submissions made and the information supplied, the Court concludes that the Claimant was dismissed in the apparent absence of fair procedure such that he was unaware that his continuing employment depended upon his reaching a satisfactory standard at the demonstration and he was unaware that he could appeal any decision to dismiss.

In all of the circumstances the Court finds the dismissal of the Claimant was procedurally unfair. Having regard to the duration of the employment and the fact that it is not the role of the Court to substitute its own views for those of the Employer in terms of the Claimant’s standard of work performance, the Court recommends that the Employer pay to the Claimant the sum of €600 in full and final settlement of the matter.

Finally, at its hearing, the Court was made aware of a financial award which the Claimant won while in the employment and there was a lack of clarity as to whether that award was ever paid to him. The Court recommends that this matter be examined by the Employer and any unpaid amount of the award should be paid to the Claimant without delay.

The Court so recommends.

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Kevin Foley
DC______________________
25 October 2019Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David Campbell, Court Secretary.