Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

An Intern

A Recording Studio

Representatives

A Family Member

A Manager

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Industrial Relations Act,1969

IR - SC - 00002938

31/07/2024

The dispute concerned the alleged Unfair Dismissal of the Worker, an “Intern” by the Employer, a Music Recording Studio.

The employment began on the 22nd August 2023 and ended on the 29th July 2024. The rate of pay was €250 per week.

Weekly working hours were the subject of much contention between the Parties.

The Worker was represented by a Family Member and submitted a detailed Written submission. Extensive Oral testimony was also given.

The Worker had been engaged on a post Graduate Intern programme in the Studio. She had successfully completed her Degree in Music Production at the associated College.

The Worker was at work on the evening of the 29th July 2024. Mr P, College President and a joint owner of the Company, requested her to come into the Interns room. As requested, she took a seat and was informed by Mr P that her employment was over. She was free to go and would not be required back to finish out her terms of the Internship (due to expire on the 18th of August 2024.)  Throughout this conversation Mr P continued to text message on his phone. In a state of shock, the Worker then approached Mr O’B, the General Manger in the Music Room. He simply stated that he presumed she had had a conversation with Mr P and did not engage in any further conversations. He turned away from her and turned up the music to such a volume that further conversion was impossible.  Unclear remarks were made regarding weekend work that the Worker had not been available for due to prior personal commitments. There was now effort to thank the Worker for her contribution during the previous year and the matter was handled with extreme rudeness and breathtaking abruptness.

Absolutely no proper employment procedures were followed as set out in SI 146 of 2000 -Statutory Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures.

In summary the Worker maintained that the ending of the employment, before the end of her fixed term had been completely Unfair as defined by all Employment Legislation.

In separate proceedings the Worker brought forward a range of Employment Conditions / Wage Payment claims.

The Employer was represented by  Manager A. An extensive written submission was provided supported by considerable Oral testimony.

The Worker had been on a One Year “Intern” programme in the Studio which was due to finish on the 18th August 2024. The Summer period is traditionally quite quiet as College students are not present and the bulk of the available work generally occurs at weekends. Mr P, the College President felt that the work requirement for the Worker had effectively dried up and he was simply allowing her to finish her internship two weeks early. She was paid in full for the entire period to the 18th August 2024. He refuted in writing any suggestions that he had been rude in the conversations. (Unfortunately, due to a prior very important Academic commitment he could not join the meeting but gave a written, signed, statement).

Manager A reiterated that the Worker had been on a well understood One Year “intern” placement. It could not be considered any form of permanent employment. She had been allowed to finish two weeks early but at no loss of renumeration. There simply could be no sustainable case of an Unfair Dismissal.

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

There was extensive Oral testimony, and considerable written materials were submitted albeit largely in the context of the various parallel Employment Legislation cases.

The Worker was very sincere in her testimony, likewise Manager A for the Employer was very professional and thoroughly prepared.

To the Adjudication Officer, operating in the Industrial Relations sphere as required by the Industrial Relations Act,1969 a number of observations were worth commenting upon.

Firstly, the entire work culture of the Studio was very “bohemian” in its style. It saw itself as a “creative space” and the traditional, possibly more staid, rules and regulations of a regular workplace were not evident. This, in itself, is not necessarily a negative.  Manager A , the Employer representative pointed out that, even if it was a leading Irish Recording Studio, normal employment practices were observed and not broken on a wholesale basis.

These other Employment  issues were explored in full in the associated employment Legislation cases.

Secondly the Worker was young and appreciated initially the Internship. She quite obviously put her heart and soul into the position. Employment opportunities in the Music Production Industry are hard to come by and the Studio would be regarded as one of the premier facilities in Ireland.

The allegation that this youthful enthusiasm was exploited by the Employer was made but in reality, was subject to such counter interpretations of Work Times and schedules as to be hard to see, to an outside Adjudication observer, as a sustainable case , based on clear uncontested evidence, of exploitation.

Finally, the ending of the relationship which was described under Sworn Oath / Affirmation was not in keeping with any standard HR or Personnel Management standards. It was very abrupt and lacking in any empathy for the young age and lack of formal work /employment experience of the Worker.  It was clear from her oral testimony, under Oath & Affirmation, that she had worked very hard and had contributed largely to the Studio during her year of internship.

Some redress is due for the entirely unnecessary personal upset caused to the Worker.

In her closing remarks and written submission, the Worker, through her Representative sought three items.

1.      A Letter of endorsement of her major efforts in the Studio during her internship

2.      The Employer to radically review their Employment practices and procedures and be subject to an external audit of same

3.      Her period of Employment be review in the light of the National Minium Wage Acts and any shortfall addressed.

The requests were not unreasonable to the Adjudicator albeit the Minimum Wages issue is the subject of separate proceedings.

In reality and in final summary the entire Intern situation in the Studio brought to mind for the Adjudicator the lyrics of the Australian singer , Kevin Johnson “Rock and Roll I gave you all the best years of my life” without it appeared any more prosaic remunerative reward or proper Employment procedures.

Unfair Dismissal