FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : THE WEE TOTS CRECHE - AND - A WORKER DIVISION :
SUBJECT: 1.Unfair Dismissal because tried to implement Tusla's Early Years Curriculum. The Worker commenced employment as a Childcare Worker with the Fountain Resource Group CLG T/A Wee Tots Creche on 9 September 2019. She was paid €525.00 gross per week. Her employment formally terminated on 6 March 2020 although the Worker had left her employment abruptly on 20 February 2020. She was paid for two weeks’ notice. The Worker claims that she was wrongfully dismissed as she had raised concerns about various practices in the workplace which she believed did not comply with regulatory requirements. The Worker was engaged on foot of a one-year fixed-term contract that included a three-month probationary period. That initial probationary period was extended for a further three months on 6 December 2019 as the Worker’s performance to date was deemed unsatisfactory and the Worker’s line manager formed the view that she was unwilling to take instructions and seemed unable to establish a satisfactory working relationship with a number of different Room Leaders with whom she was placed from time to time. The Worker told the Court that she accepts that she had behaved unprofessionally on two occasions: once when she shouted at a child in her care and also when she left a child unattended in a bathroom. She denies any other incidents of poor performance and submits that she was not treated as a professionally qualified equal by her work colleagues. In her view, she further submits, she raised issues of standards and compliance with S?olta guidelines and Children First requirements which she believed were not being fully observed in the workplace. The Worker referred a number of complaints about practices in her former workplace to T?sla some months after her employment had terminated. The Employer submits that the complaints were investigated by T?sla and found to be unsubstantiated. Discussion and Recommendation Having carefully considered the Parties’ submissions, the Court finds that the Worker’s complaint is not well-founded. The Court finds that the Employer made all reasonable efforts to integrate the Worker into the workplace and legitimately extended the Worker’s probationary period in order to address genuine concerns about her performance and her ability to co-operate with her co-workers. Ultimately, the Employer had good reason to decide that the Worker was not a good fit in the organisation and terminated her employment with two weeks’ paid notice within the extended probationary period, having put the Worker on full notice of their concerns about her performance and having given her ample opportunity to address those performance concerns. The Court does not recommend concession of the within complaint. The Court so recommends.
NOTE Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Therese Hickey, Court Secretary. |
