Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A Worker

An Information Technology Company

Representatives

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-00060775-001

31/12/2023

The worker has advanced a claim of unfair dismissal. He states that he commenced employment on 11 September 2023 and his employment was terminated on 11 November 2023.

The worker states that he was hired as a Content Specialist with the employer. The worker states that he was deployed to work on tasks from a client company. He states that 6 weeks later on 27 October, he was informed that the client company had requested that no more of their tasks should be assigned to him. The worker states that the employer informed him that because of this, there was no more work available for him and in those circumstances the employer had to terminate his contract on the same day. The worker states that his contract was fully terminated two weeks later on 11 November 2023.

The worker states that he feels that his termination of employment is unfair. He states that at no point did the employer inform him that the client company was considering withdrawing their work from him. The worker states that the work relationship started off rocky because he was misrepresented by the employer’s recruiters (who claimed that he possessed skills and experience that he does not) but the worker states that he was essentially able to carry out the requested tasks and that he and the client company were working towards a mutual understanding of what would be possible.

The worker states that, in the week that he was told his employment was being terminated, he had been working full-time to try and resolve a critical issue and was completely blindsided by the termination. The worker states that he is of the view that with the withdrawal of the client company’s work, it was the employer’s legal responsibility to attempt to find other positions within the company for him and/or to mediate alternative resolutions before reaching for termination of his employment.      

The employer states that the worker’s employment was terminated as a result of the worker’s unsatisfactory performance during his probationary period and that the dismissal was carried out in accordance with the procedures set out in the worker’s contract of employment.

The employer asserts that the worker commenced employment with it on 14 September 2023. The employer states that the worker’s contract contains a provision stipulating a probationary period of 6 months which could be extended to a period of 12 months in total. The clause also provided that the employer was entitled to terminate the worker’s employment on two weeks’ notice during the probationary period or pay two weeks’ pay in lieu of notice.

The employer states that it quickly became apparent once the worker commenced employment that he was not working to the standard required. The employer states that he was advised of the issues concerning his performance in or around 11 October by the Associate Content Director and regular meetings were arranged thereafter between the worker and the Content Development Manager to help the worker understand where he could improve. The employer states that unfortunately the worker’s performance did not improve.

The employer states that on 26 October 2023 it decided to terminate the complainant’s employment on grounds of unsatisfactory performance.

The employer arranged a meeting with the worker to notify him of the decision to terminate his employment. Pursuant to the worker’s contract of employment, the employer gave the worker 2 weeks’ notice of termination of his employment and the worker’s last day of employment was 10 November 2023.

The employer states that the termination of the worker’s employment during the probationary period set out in the contract of employment was lawful and that the termination was conducted in accordance with the terms of the employment contract.       

In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.

Having examined the within dispute, I find that the complainant’s employment was terminated within the six-month probationary period provided for in his contract on grounds of unsatisfactory performance.

I note that the employer highlighted to the worker a number of issues that were of concern to it, provided guidance during follow up meetings with the worker following the initial meeting with him to discuss his unsatisfactory performance. Based on the information provided, I note that the employer gave the worker an opportunity to improve but ultimately the employer found that the worker’s performance was below the required standards and a decision was made to terminate his employment in line with the procedure set out pursuant to the complainant’s contract of employment. Based on the information heard, I am satisfied that the procedures adopted by the employer were conducted fairly and in accordance with natural justice.

In all of the circumstances of the within dispute, I find that the worker’s claim is not well founded. Therefore, I do not recommend in favour of the worker.      

Industrial Relations Acts