FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : MID-WESTERN HEALTH BOARD - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Dismissal.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned was employed by the Health Board as a temporary porter from the 30th of April,
2001. He claims he was unfairly dismissed on the 1st of July, 2001.
The Board rejects the claim stating that he had two periods of temporary employment. His first contract was from the 30th of April, 2001, to the 30th of May, 2001, and the second contract was from the 1st of June, 2001, to the 1st of July, 2001. He was not offered a third contract.
The issue was referred to the Labour Court on the 3rd of January, 2002, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 17th of April, 2002. The Union agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. A large number of temporary employees are taken on by the Board and the vast majority progress to permanent full time positions. The worker concerned had an expectation that his employment would be continued on the same basis.
2. Management did not speak to the worker concerned regarding his dismissal. He was not given the opportunity to defend himself.
3. The worker concerned was unfairly dismissed and should be reinstated.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Board employs a large number of temporary staff to fill short-term vacancies which arise. These staff do not have any right to continued or extended employment with the Board.
2. The worker concerned had two periods of temporary employment with the Board. He was not offered a third contract and was not given the impression that he would be.
3. Information relating to the worker's background came to light which caused concern regarding his suitability for employment as a hospital porter. This was an influencing factor in the decision not to offer him a further contract.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court is satisfied that the nature of the claimant's transgressions 15 years ago, was such as to reasonably believe that it could be disregarded for temporary employment as pertaining in the Hospital.
The Court notes that a screening process has been put in place by the Hospital to prevent a similar situation applying in the future.
In all the circumstances of this case, the Court recommends that the claimant be placed on a panel for temporary employment as a porter in the Hospital.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
29th April, 2002______________________
GB/MBDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.