|
FULL DECISION
SECTION 44, WORKPLACE RELATIONS ACT 2015 SECTION 8A, UNFAIR DISMISSAL ACTS, 1977 TO 2015 PARTIES: DOYLE'S SUPERMARKET LTD T/A LONDIS
AND SARAH MURPHY DIVISION:
SUBJECT: Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00036018 (CA-00047178-001)
The Worker appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court on 10 July 2023 in accordance with Section 8A of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 to 2015. A Labour Court hearing took place on 28 November 2023. The following is the Decision of the Court. DECISION: Background to the Appeal This is an appeal by Ms Sarah Murphy (‘the Complainant’) from a decision of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00036018, dated 31 May 2023) under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 (‘the Act’). The Adjudication Officer decided that the complaint of unfair dismissal was well-founded and awarded the Complainant compensation of €5,000.00. Notice of Appeal was received in the Court on 10 July 2023. The Court heard the appeal in Waterford on 28 November 2023.
Submissions Mr Anthony Doyle, representing Doyle’s Supermarket T/A Londis (‘the Respondent’) submitted that the Respondent accepted the finding of the Adjudication Officer that there had been significant deficiencies in the process that preceded the Complainant’s dismissal on 27 July 2021. Mr Doyle also told the Court that the Respondent had put in place a comprehensive disciplinary policy since the first instance hearing in this case. Finally, Mr Doyle submitted that the Respondent regarded the quantum of compensation awarded by the Adjudication Officer as ‘just and equitable’. The Complainant outlined to the Court the efforts she made to mitigate her loss following her dismissal. She said that she was in receipt of a social welfare payment for about six weeks until she secured an alternative full-time retail position in September 2021 for which she was paid €11.70 per hour. She remained in this job for approximately three weeks only. A period of unemployment for about a year followed until she obtained her next employment. The Complainant is currently undertaking a further education course in Wexford.
Discussion and Decision The Court, having given careful consideration to the Parties’ submissions, upholds that the decision of the Adjudication Officer. The Court so decides.
NOTE Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Aidan Ralph, Court Secretary. |
