Investigation Recommendation Reference: ADJ-00048998
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Beauty Therapist | A Beauty Clinic |
Representatives |
|
|
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-00055764-007 | 22/03/2023 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00055764-008 | 22/03/2023 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Date of Hearing: 18 October 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 Worker commenced her employment as a Beauty Therapist with the Employer on 4 August 2022. She stated that she was unfairly dismissed on 17 August 2022. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The Worker stated that the Employer had told her that she was a very good worker on Monday 12 August but on Saturday 17 August she was told that she was dismissed without any warning whatsoever having been received in the meantime. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Employer stated that the Worker was unsuitable, and a decision was therefore made to dismiss her from their employment. |
Conclusions:
CA-00055764-007 and CA-00055764-008:
In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.
In making a recommendation in respect of these disputes, I note the Labour Court Recommendation in the matter of, Mental Health Commission v A Worker (LCR 22316) wherein the Court stated: The Worker accepted at the outset of the Court hearing that she was pursuing this appeal under the Industrial Relations Act in addition to a separate case under the Employment Equality Acts and that both cases are based on the same set of facts. Therefore, the Court notes that the dispute between the parties is being pursued as a matter of employment law under the Employment Equality Acts and that it would be inappropriate for the Court to recommend concession of the Worker’s claim under the Industrial Relations Act. I note that, in relation to the instant disputes, the Worker is also seeking to pursue a separate complaint under the Employment Equality Acts (See ADJ 45870) and that all of the cases are based on the same sets of facts. Accordingly, I cannot make a recommendation in favour of the Worker in respect of these two disputes, which are overlapping. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
CA-00055764-007 and CA-00055764-008:
I cannot make a recommendation that is favourable to the Worker in respect of these disputes for the reasons set out above.
Dated: 22/02/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill