ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00000940
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Leisure centre attendant | A Leisure Centre |
Representatives | Complainant | Rebecca DeGroot Peninsula |
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 | IR - SC - 00000940 | 27/11/2022 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Shay Henry
Date of Hearing: 23/05/2023
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.
Background:
The complainant does not have the required 12 months service specified in the Unfair Dismissals Act but alleges that the respondent failed to follow its own disciplinary procedures in dismissing him. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The complainant commenced work with the respondent as a Professional Leisure Attendant on 28 March 2022 and worked there until 28 July 2022 when he was dismissed. This complaint is regarding an unfair dismissal on two grounds: firstly, it came after a protected disclosure, and secondly, the dismissal was not in line with company procedures. There were no verbal or written warnings regarding the complainant’s work performance except during an incident while the complainant was being detained by his supervisor. The dismissal came soon after complainant lodged a grievance regarding the detention. The complainant had requested to move to the next stage of the grievance procedure, in line with company procedures, as the incident was of a sufficiently serious nature that a mediation meeting was unacceptable. He was fired two days after this.
|
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The complainant states that; The recourse I am seeking for CA-00052863-005 is compensation for being unfairly dismissed, the failure to follow company procedures and failure to follow the Workplace Relation Commission Code of Practice: Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures. The respondent submits that the complainant in referring a dispute to the WRC for unfair dismissal, is trying to succeed on one issue under two statutes. The respondent further submits that the complainant does not have the requisite one year’s continuous service necessary to progress a claim for unfair dismissal. The respondent submits that that the dismissal of the complainant was appealed. This appeal was held by a third party. The third party investigated the termination and found it to be unfair. There is no dismissal as the complainant was reinstated. |
Conclusions:
In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties. I have dealt with all of the complaints under other legislation and therefore cannot deal with the issues again under the Industrial Relations legislation. I find that this complaint is not well founded. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
The complaint is not well founded
Dated: 15/12/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Shay Henry
Key Words:
Matters dealt with under other legislation |