Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95511 Case Number: LCR15030 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: THE LAUNDRY AND DRY CLEANING SHOP - and - A WORKER |
Alleged unfair dismissal
Recommendation:
The employer did not attend the Court hearing and, therefore, the
only evidence presented was that of the claimant.
It is clear from the evidence presented that no warning was given
to the claimant at any stage by her employer in relation to her
performance. Indeed, her employer confirmed that she had done
nothing wrong nor had her work been unsatisfactory.
Given this, the Court finds that the action of her employer in
dismissing her without any reason, and at such short notice, was
totally unacceptable, and not in keeping with what would be
expected of a good employer.
The Court is also concerned that the claimant was given no
contract of employment and was dismissed for no apparent reason,
despite being told by the manageress she was permanent when
employed.
Given all the information before it, the Court recommends that the
employer pay the claimant a sum of £250 as compensation, and
supply the claimant with a suitable reference.
Division: Mr Flood Mr Pierce Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95511 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR15030
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
THE LAUNDRY AND DRY CLEANING SHOP
AND
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
Alleged unfair dismissal
BACKGROUND:
The worker commenced employment on 3rd July, 1994. She
worked part-time, from 5.00 p.m. to 10.30 p.m., three
evenings per week.
On 15th June, 1995, the worker was informed by her employer
that she was to be let go. She was told by her employer that
the reason for her dismissal was that the Company was making
"radical changes".
The worker referred the dispute to the Labour Court on 4th
September, 1995, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took
place on 4th December, 1995. The Company did not attend or
present a written submission.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The worker had carried out her duties properly and had never
received any complaints about her work. Other workers who
had been employed after her were retained. The employer has
since advertised for more part-time workers. The worker was
given no notice that she was to be dismissed. She was told
that her employment would be permanent.
RECOMMENDATION:
The employer did not attend the Court hearing and, therefore, the
only evidence presented was that of the claimant.
It is clear from the evidence presented that no warning was given
to the claimant at any stage by her employer in relation to her
performance. Indeed, her employer confirmed that she had done
nothing wrong nor had her work been unsatisfactory.
Given this, the Court finds that the action of her employer in
dismissing her without any reason, and at such short notice, was
totally unacceptable, and not in keeping with what would be
expected of a good employer.
The Court is also concerned that the claimant was given no
contract of employment and was dismissed for no apparent reason,
despite being told by the manageress she was permanent when
employed.
Given all the information before it, the Court recommends that the
employer pay the claimant a sum of £250 as compensation, and
supply the claimant with a suitable reference.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
18th December, 1995 Finbarr Flood
C.O.N./A.K. ---------------
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.