INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
- AND -
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
Chairman: Mr McGrath
Employer Member: Mr Brennan
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
1. Alleged unfair dismissal.
2. On the basis of the information before the Court, the background to this dispute is as follows: The worker concerned was employed by Dunnes Stores, Clondalkin, on behalf of "Tender Meats" a company which is involved in the supply to and selling of meats at counters at various Dunnes Stores outlets. On his appointment in early December, 1996, the worker was advised of what was required of him in his new position. He was also informed that he would be on the payroll of Tender Meats but that Dunnes Stores would pay him cash in the short term, until the formalities of his employment were finalised. The worker gave his P45, etc., to his father to hand in at the Tender Meats factory in Clondalkin, where he (the father) was employed.
On being presented with the documentation, the manager of Tender Meats claimed that he had not authorised Dunnes Stores to employ anyone for Tender Meats and that this would not happen as Tender Meats were not the only suppliers to the counter in Dunnes Stores. When the worked raised the matter with Dunnes Stores he was informed by the Personnel Manager that matters would be sorted out.
After 8 days' employment the worker was dismissed on the grounds that 2 of his references had not worked out favourably. He was paid two weeks' pay for the 8 days he worked. The worker referred the matter to the Labour Court on the 14th of February, 1997, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Court carried out its investigation on the 19th of March, 1997. The Company declined to attend at the Court hearing.
3. 1. It was unacceptably unprofessional of Dunnes Stores to advertise for a Butcher/Red Meats Counter Manager for Tender Meats without first checking with that Company.
2. The worker was informed by Dunnes Stores that, as he had not been employed by Tender Meats, he would be working for Dunnes Stores.
3. The Company had 3 weeks in which to investigate the worker's references prior to his starting date.
4. The worker was a victim of a separate dispute that existed between Dunnes Stores and Tender Meats.
5. The worker gave up long-term reliable employment to work at Dunnes Stores and should be apologised to and compensated accordingly. As he has since commenced employment with another butcher, he is not seeking reinstatement.
The Court has fully considered all of the views expressed by the Complainant in his oral and written submission together with his responses to the questions put by the Court.
The Company chose not to be represented at the hearing.
In the light of the above the Court finds:-
(1) That the claimant was employed by Dunnes Stores;
(2) That they, Dunnes Stores, hadadequate opportunity to check his references before making an offer of employment;
(3) Thatthey did not regularise the worker's employment and dismissed him without reason;
(4) That they did not pay him his notice;
(5) That they terminated his employment in an unfair manner.
The Court recommends that the Company pays him a lump sum of £500 in full and final settlement of his dispute and that they apologise for the difficulty they caused as a consequence of the inadequate application of their recruiting procedures in this case.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
8th of April, 1997______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.