ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR-SC-00003332
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Porter | A Security Company |
Representatives | Self-Represented | Did not attend |
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 | CA-00066527 | 07/10/2024 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Dónal Moore
Date of Hearing: 13/02/2025
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 was dismissed from his role as a Porter on a site serviced by the Employer. Originally, the Worker made a complaint under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000. This was in error and withdrew this for a new complaint under S13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 in relation to unfair dismissal. This revised complaint was shared with all parties. In his Claim the Worker provided substantial documentation to the Commission on his roster and communications with the Employer In the absence of any submissions from the Employer I allowed him to give the narrative of his claim. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The Worker enjoyed their role with the Employer. He had no incidents of discipline during his time except for one incident where he left the site early. In subsequent investigations of this and appeal the Worker had “held up his hand” to the matters of the investigation of leaving the site early. Additionally, it was contended that he was rude to a client manager on site, and he refutes this was the case. He requested a copy of the allegation of this and was not afforded an opportunity to address the matter and defend himself. Having exhausted the appeals process, he was dismissed for Gross Misconduct and for a purported disrespect of a site Manager. The effect of this dismissal has been profound to the Worker causing him mental distress and has affected his family life He subsequently found a similar role and has expressed no wish to be re-engaged or reinstated with the Employer and seeks compensation. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Employer failed to attend and offer their position on the dispute. |
Conclusions:
In conducting my investigation, I have considered all relevant submissions presented to me.
The Employer had notice of the hearing and chose not to attend or make a submission. In the absence of contrary submissions, I find the Workers submission to be true and accurate and that the sanction imposed on him for one offence to be dismissal as excessive.
I find that that he was not allowed to challenge the allegation of rudeness to the site manager fundamentally flawed the processes used and I recommend a sum of money to be made to the Worker in the amount of €500. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
As cited above, I recommend that the Employer pay the Worker the amount of €500
Dated: 27th of March 2025.
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Donal Moore
Key Words:
Nonattendance. Unfair dismissal. |