INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
- AND -
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
Chairman: Ms Jenkinson
Employer Member: Mr Doherty
Worker Member: Mr. Somers
1. Sacked for reporting faulty radiator.
2. The worker was employed with the Company as a Customer Services Representative from the 21st October, 2002, to the 5th February, 2003. She was employed to answer calls in the Company's call centre.
The Union alleges that its member was unfairly dismissed because she made complaints to management over the working environment operating in the Company.
Management rejected the Union's claim.
The worker referred the dispute to the Labour Court on the 21st August, 2003, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation. The Court investigated the dispute in Waterford on the 4th November, 2003.
3. 1. Management denied the worker her right to fair procedures and to representation of her choice.
2. Workers have a right to fair procedures in order that their grievances are dealt with in a fair and equitable manner.
3. Management informed the worker that the Company did not recognise trade unions. She was subsequently told that she had been sacked.
4. The Union requests the Court to find in its favour and to compensate the worker accordingly.
4. 1 During the worker's threemonths of employment with the Company, her supervisor received several complaints from customers in relation to the quality of her work.
2. The worker received further training to enable her to complete her tasks correctly. However, the quality of her work continued to be unacceptable.
3. Management continued to support the worker and allowed her every opportunity to improve herself.
4. When management received a complaint from the worker about a faulty radiator, that area was immediately closed off and the worker moved to the main area of the call centre. The Company prides itself on maintaining high standards in relation to health and safety.
5. The worker stated that she was not happy in her job. It was agreed between the parties that the worker could give in her notice and that she would be paid a week's pay in lieu of notice.
The Court has considered the submissions of both parties and is of the view that the circumstances of the worker's termination of employment amount to an unfair dismissal. Having made complaints about conditions of her employment it was suggested by her employer that she might be happier if she left the employment and was promptly escorted off the premises. In all the circumstances of this case the Court recommends that she should be paid compensation of €5000 in full and final settlement of all claims against the Company.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
20th November, 2003______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.