|
FULL RECOMMENDATION
MN/22/26
ADJ-00027763 CA-00035625-001 |
DETERMINATION NO. MND238
|
MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2005
PARTIES:
TESCO IRELAND LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
LINDA MAGUIRE
(REPRESENTED BY MACKAY SOLICITORS)
DIVISION:
| Chairman: |
Ms Connolly |
| Employer Member: |
Mr O'Brien |
| Worker Member: |
Mr Bell |
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal Of Adjudication Officer Decision No ADJ-00027763 CA-00035625-001
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court on 4 November 2022 in accordance with Section 44 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015. A Labour Court hearing took place on 17 May 2023. The following is the Determination of the Court.
DETERMINATION:
This is an appeal by Linda Maguire (‘the Complainant’) of a decision of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00027763, dated 11 October 2022) under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973 (‘the Act’). The Adjudication Officer held that the Complainant’s claim against her former employer Tesco Ireland Limited (“the Respondent”) was not well founded.
This case is linked to UD/22/129. The Court heard both appeals on 17 May 2023.
Background
The Complainant was employed as a Customer Assistant from August 2008 until 25 October 2019 when her employment was terminated on the grounds of serious misconduct.
The Act
The Act at Section 8 provides as follows:
- 4.—(1) An employer shall, in order to terminate the contract of employment of an employee who has been in his continuous service for a period of thirteen weeks or more, give to that employee a minimum period of notice calculated in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section.
(2) The minimum notice to be given by an employer to terminate the contract of employment of his employee shall be—
…
(e) if the employee has been in the continuous service of his employer for fifteen years or more, eight weeks.
The Act at Section 8 provides as follows:
- 8.— Nothing in this Act shall affect the right of any employer or employee to terminate a contract of employment without notice because of misconduct by the other party.
Deliberation
In the linked case UD/22/129 the Court has determined that the decision to dismiss the Complainant for serious misconduct was not unfair.
The Respondent’s policies provides that no notice is payable in respect of dismissal for “serious misconduct”. Therefore, the Complainant has no entitlement to notice and the complaint must fail.
The appeal fails. The Decision of the Adjudication Officer is upheld.
The Court so determines.
 |
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court |
|
|
|
Katie Connolly |
| AR |
______________________ |
| 26 July 2023 |
Deputy Chairman |
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to Aidan Ralph, Court Secretary.
|
