LCR22590

1.Unfair Dismissal.

BACKGROUND:

2.The Worker appealed against her dismissal under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 on the 21 October 2021. A Labour Court hearing took place in a virtual setting on 3 May 2022.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Worker commenced employment on the 26^thJanuary 2021 in the role of Health Care Assistant. The employment came to an end on the 12^thMarch 2021. It is the Worker’s submission that she was unfairly dismissed.

Summary of Employer’s submission

The Employer stated that they had received complaints from two residents. By letter of 5^thMarch 2021, the Employer invited the worker to a meeting. The letter stated that the meeting was to discuss her role as a health care assistant and an alleged failure to perform to a satisfactory standard. The Worker was advised she could bring a representative or a colleague and that the outcome could lead to sanctions up to and including dismissal. The meeting took place on the 8^thMarch 2021, at the meeting the Worker was given the opportunity to comment on the allegations. The Complainant disagreed with one of the complaints but accepted that she had on one occasion left a resident unattended. By letter of the 10^thMarch the Worker was invited to a determination meeting, the minutes of the meeting held on 8^thMarch 2021 were attached to the letter. At the meeting on the 12 March 2021 the Worker was advised that her contract was being terminated as she did not meet the required standard. The decision to dismiss was then confirmed by letter dated 12 March 2021 and the Worker was advised that she could appeal the decision and who to make the appeal to. The Worker lodged an appeal on the 19^thMarch 2021. By letter of the 23^rdMarch 2021 she was advised that her appeal had failed and the decision to dismiss was upheld.

Summary of Worker’s submission

The Worker submitted that one of the residents had taken a dislike to her, there had been an incident and she realised in hindsight she should have reported it but she did not. In respect of the second incident, she had left to get gloves and an apron but had been side-tracked. She had not intended to leave the resident on their own. The Worker said she was on probation and learning how things were done she did not think that she would be dismissed for one or two errors. The Worker said she was surprised when she saw the letter which said she was being sacked for gross misconduct as that had never been mentioned at the meetings.

Discussion.

The Code of Practise on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures S.I. No. 146 of 2000 sets out the minimum standards that should apply in a disciplinary procedure. One of the main requirements is that the allegations are put to the Worker. In this case the only allegation put to the worker was that she was not fulfilling her role to the standard required. However, the letter of dismissal stated that she was dismissed for gross misconduct, a charge that was never put to her. On that basis the Court finds that fair procedure was not followed and therefore the dismissal was unfair.

The Court having carefully considered the submissions received recommends that the Employer pay the Worker €3,000 in full and final settlement of this claim.

The Court so Recommends.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Louise O'Donnell
TH	______________________
18 May 2022	Deputy Chairman