Complainant

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A Worker

A Packaging Company

Representatives

Frank McDonnell

IBEC

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts

CA-00039684-001

08/09/2020

The Worker commenced employment with the Employer as a General Warehouse Operative on a temporary basis on 15th October 2019 and his employment ended on 28th June 2020. His basic rate of pay was €13.17 per hour and he was contracted to work 39 hours per week from 8am to 4.30pm daily. He is claiming that he was unfairly selected for redundancy.

The Worker stated that he was hired on a three month contract on 15th October 2019 and was based in dispatch. He also worked as an extra man to cover any machines that he was required on.  He was given a three month contract extension on 28th January 2020 and was told he would be attending a forklift course in an external training centre. He stated that having completed this training, he received his forklift license and was given a role of general operative.

On 2nd April 2020, he was given a two month contract extension. He stated that he knew his contract was temporary and applied for three positions that became available for

machines that he had experience on. Despite the interviews having gone well, he was unsuccessful in his applications and claimed that the roles were filled by external personnel.

He acknowledged that his contract expired on 31st May 2020 but stated that he did not receive a new contract afterwards. He alleged that an incident occurred in the first week of June where a supervisor told him in front of a colleague that he was the boss and the Worker was his minion. He stated the he was embarrassed and angry by what had happened and reported the incident to the shop steward. He believed however that the matter was not handled correctly and made things bad for him. He stated that two weeks after the incident, he had some holidays booked off and that when he returned to work on 15 June 2020, he heard rumours from other workers that his position was gone but didn't hear anything from the management. On 22nd June 2020, he was asked to call down to the HR manager’s office and was notified that his employment would be terminated on 30th June 2020 due to Covid-19.

He stated that he found this hard to believe because the company had hired multiple people since the pandemic began and hired another employee just two weeks previously. He continued to work until 28th of June and on 29th of June 2020, the day after he ceased employment, a job advertisement went up on the notice board for a warehouse operative.  The advertisement stated that all applicants should apply by June 30th 2020.

The Worker also added that he did not receive a work uniform during the duration of his employment despite multiple requests for one and alleged that every employee hired after him had received his full uniform. He also stated that since ceasing employment with the Employer, he has talked to multiple employees who informed him that 6-8 people have being hired since his contract was terminated.

The Worker’s father-in-law who was an employee of the Employer at the time made a request on behalf of the Worker for a couple of weeks’ work in October 2019. This request coincided with the introduction of SAP to the warehouse and consequently there was work available.

Initially the Worker was given a contract for a three-month period from October 2019 to

January 2019. This contract was extended by a further 3 months on 28th January 2020 and

again by 2 months on 2nd April 2020. During this period, a number of vacant roles were

posted on the internal notice board as is the custom and practice in the company and agreed with the union. The Worker applied for these roles but was unsuccessful due to this lack of experience. All of these advertised roles were filled internally and the Employer categorically refuted the assertions made by the Worker that individuals were hired externally.

The headcount report for 2020 produced by the Employer illustrated that no temporary general operatives were hired following the Worker’s departure in June 2020 until October 2020 when a number of general operatives were hired to cater for the increased demand experienced around Christmas. It was also asserted that, following an internal re-structure in 2019 and 2020, one role was made compulsorily redundant and several voluntary redundancies were effected.

The Employer also stated that whilst the Covid pandemic had an impact on the Employer this was not the reason the Worker was made redundant and the letters provided to him were done so to facilitate his claim for the Pandemic Unemployment Payment.

I note firstly that no direct evidence was presented to me by the Worker to demonstrate that the Employer had recruited external personnel to carry out the work that he was doing and I am satisfied, in the absence of such evidence, that all of the advertised roles were filled internally.

I am also satisfied that the Worker was engaged on a short-term basis to cover a temporary work requirement given that he was issued with three short term contracts over his 8.5 month tenure with the Employer. While I recognise that his third contract of employment finished at the end of May 2020 and that his employment was not terminated until the end of June, I find that this was a genuine oversight on behalf of the Employer and that the Worker’s role was made redundant because the short-term role he had been employed to fulfil was no longer required. 

Finally, I am satisfied that the letter given to the Worker stating that his employment was ending as a result of the Covid pandemic was given to him in order to maximise his social welfare benefits.

In light of the foregoing, I cannot make a recommendation in favour of the Worker

I cannot make a recommendation in favour of the Worker for the reasons set out above.