INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
DAVID MCCORMACK & COMPANY ARCHITECTS
(REPRESENTED BY JAMES M. DONOHOE & COMPANY, SOLICITORS.)
- AND -
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Grier
Worker Member: Mr Nash
1. Alleged unfair dismissal.
2. The case concerns a dispute between the worker and his former employer in relation to alleged unfair dismissal. The worker is claiming that he was unfairly dismissed, without warning, having identified irregularities to his employer concerning his terms and conditions of employment. The employer's position is that the worker was dismissed having received several warnings concerning his performance.
On the 20th November, 2003, the worker referred the issue to the Labour Court, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. Labour Court hearings took place on the 8th April, 2005, 23rd November, 2005, and 14th September, 2006.
The worker agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.
3. 1. No contracts of employment or wage slips were provided during the period of employment.Wages were paid partly in cash and partly by cheque, which subsequently caused difficulty for the worker in seeking mortgage approval.
2. When the discrepancies between take home pay and P60 earnings were raised with management, management refused to clarify the position. When these issues were subsequently raised to the Revenue Commissioners, the worker was dismissed without warning or investigation.
4. 1. No contract of employment or wage slips were requested by the worker. If they had been requested, they would have been provided as it is the worker's legal entitlement.
2. The discrepancies were the subject of a Revenue Audit and the relevant P60 and P45 were re-issued to the worker.
3. The worker had already stated his intention to leave the employment. In this regard the dismissal cannot be regarded as unfair as the worker had already chosen to leave.
The Claimant told the Court that the only issue which he was pursuing in the present referral was his claim of unfair dismissal.
The Court is not satisfied that the Claimant received adequate or appropriate warnings concerning the matters alleged to constitute the grounds for his dismissal. In these circumstances of the case the Court accepts that the dismissal of the Claimant was unfair. The Court recommends that the employer offer and that the Claimant accept compensation in the amount of €2,000 in settlement of the claim before the Court.
The Court notes that the Claimant has other grievances relating to his employment relating to the alleged failure of the Employer to provide pay slips and a written
statement of the terms of his employment.
These matters come within the scope of specific legislative provisions. They have not been taken into account by the Court in this recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
22nd September, 2006______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.