ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: Adj-00045746
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | Hairdresser | Hair and Beauty Salon |
Representatives | self | No show |
Dispute(s):
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended) | CA-00056615 | 20/10/2022 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Date of Hearing: 27/04/2023
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended)following the referral of the dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any information relevant to the dispute(s).
Background:
The Worker commenced her employment on or about the 14th of June 2022. Her employment ended on or about the 20th of October 2022. The Complainant was on a monthly gross salary €1215. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The Worker stated that she was summarily dismissed without being provided any reason or any opportunity to improve.
|
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Employer sought a postponement at short notice prehearing. That request was declined and was informed that the application could be made at the scheduled hearing. No application was made as the Employer did not attend at the hearing. |
Conclusions:
In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.
SI No 146/2000 code of practice requires that the worker is afforded fairness during her probationary period: 6. The procedures for dealing with such issues reflecting the varying circumstances of enterprises/organisations, must comply with the general principles of natural justice and fair procedures which include: • That employee grievances are fairly examined and processed; • That details of any allegations or complaints are put to the employee concerned; • That the employee concerned is given the opportunity to respond fully to any such allegations or complaints; • That the employee concerned is given the opportunity to avail of the right to be represented during the procedure; • That the employee concerned has the right to a fair and impartial determination of the issues concerned, taking into account any representations made by, or on behalf of, the employee and any other relevant or appropriate evidence, factors or circumstances. The Labour Court in Beachside Company Limited LCR 21798 considered if a worker could rely upon SI no 146 of 2000 during the probationary period. That decision stated: Where an employee is considered unsuitable for permanent employment, the Court accepts that an employer has the right, during a probationary period, to decide not to retain that employee in employment. However, the Court takes the view that this can only be carried out where the employer adheres strictly to fair procedures. The Court made a very substantial award in that case. I find that the worker was unfairly dismissed arising from being summarily dismissed in breach of fair procedures. She was provided with no detail of where her performance was not acceptable, she was provided with no opportunity to respond to any allegation, she was provided with no opportunity to improve. For these reasons I find for the worker. The fact that this is a small business is a factor I have taken in account when determining what amount of compensation should be awarded. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
Having regard to the circumstances of this case and the evidence I heard I find that the worker was unfairly dismissed and recommend that the employer pay her €1000 in compensation arising from their failure to comply with SI 146/20000.
Dated: 1st June 2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Key Words:
Unfair Dismissal-Fair Procedures |