INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PAT THE BAKER
- AND -
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr McHenry
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
1. Alleged unfair dismissal.
2. The worker commenced employment with the Company on the 8th of September, 1997 delivering bread to shops and supermarkets etc. The worker claims that in August, 1998 he was dismissed from his employment without any written or verbal warning.
The worker states that in February, 1998 he was hospitalised for a week in Naas Hospital following an accident while in the employment of the Company. He was out of work for four weeks as a result of the accident. The worker was eventually dismissed in August, 1998. No explanation was given for the worker's dismissal.
The worker referred the dispute to the Labour Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The worker agreed to be bound by the decision of the Court. The Court investigated the dispute on 22nd February, 1999.
The Company indicated by letter that it would not be attending the Labour Court hearing.
3. 1. During the period of his employment with the Company no complaints were made concerning the worker's ability to perform his duties satisfactorily.
2. No explanation was given by management as to why the worker was being dismissed.
3. The worker's supervisor was surprised at the manner of his dismissal. The worker claims that he has been unfairly treated by the Company.
4. The worker received no written or verbal warning concerning his work performance.
The Court has considered the submission made by the claimant in this case together with the letter received from the employer.
The Court considered it regrettable that the employer failed to attend the hearing or to offer any substantial response to the worker’s claim.
The Court notes that the employer indicated in the letter to the Court that they would not be attending because the present case is connected with a civil action being pursued by the worker. The evidence to the Court indicated that there is no basis for this assertion.
Based on the uncontradicted evidence of the claimant the Court finds as follows:-
1. That the claimant had successfully completed a six months probation period.
2. That at no time during the currency of his employment was the claimant made aware of any dissatisfaction with his performance or standard of work.
3. That the claimant was dismissed from his employment, having completed eleven months service, without being given any reason or explanation.
In the absence of any justification having being put forward by the employer for this dismissal the Court can only concluded that it was unfair. The Court believes that the claimant is entitled to be compensated for the full extend of his loss suffered in consequence of his dismissal. The claimant told the Court that he has since obtained employment having been unemployed for some six months.
The Court recommends that the claimant be paid compensation in the amount of £5,000 in full and final settlement of all claims arising from his dismissal.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
25th February, 1999______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.