ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: ADJ-00042799
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Receptionist | A Hotel |
Representatives | N/A | N/A |
Dispute(s):
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA - 00053746 | 17/11/2022 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Date of Hearing: 14/07/2023
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended)following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any information relevant to the dispute.
Although I am satisfied that the Employer was on notice of the time and date of the hearing, they did not attend to give evidence. The Worker was in attendance on his own and gave evidence in relation to his complaint.
Background:
The Worker stated that he began his employment as a Receptionist with the Employer on 1 March 2022. He alleged that he was unfairly dismissed on 13 October 2022 following an incident with a customer who was racially abusive towards him. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The Worker stated that on the night of 7/8 October 2022 a customer who had no prior booking in the hotel attempted to check in. As well as having no reservation, the customer sought to pay in Northern Irish sterling as she had no euros in cash. In the circumstances, the Worker would not check her in and she made some racially abusive remarks at him following his refusal to do so. As a result, the Worker called the Gardai to remove her from the premises.
The following day, the Worker received a text message from his Employer informing him that he should not attend work as there was an investigation into the incident of the night before. It was further clarified to the Worker that he was being suspended with pay.
A few days later, on 13 October 2022, the Worker attended an investigation meeting with the duty manager and HR where he was asked why he called the Gardai and why he refused to accommodate the person who was attempting to check in. He stated that he couldn't check her in because she had no euros and he had been told by his manager not to let anyone check in without a payment.
Further to the investigation meeting, the Worker was dismissed and did not receive confirmation of the termination of his employment in writing even though he had asked for same. He also stated his belief that the Employer used the incident to dismiss him as they did not want to deliver on promises to him that had previously been made. He also alleged that the Employer had breached his contract on numerous occasions over the course of his employment.
|
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Employer did not attend the hearing to give evidence. |
Conclusions:
While there may have been substantive reasons behind the Employer’s decision to dismiss the Worker, I note that these were not presented by way of evidence at the hearing. Moreover, I find that the procedures adopted fell short of the standard set out in SI 146/2000. Specifically, I am satisfied, based on the evidence presented by the Worker, that he was not afforded the opportunity to defend his position at a disciplinary hearing and was not allowed to appeal the decision to dismiss him. Accordingly, I find that the dismissal was unfair. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
Taking all of the circumstances of this case into account, I recommend in favour of the Worker and find that the Employer should pay compensation in the amount of €2,500 in respect of this dismissal.
Dated: 29/08/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Key Words:
|