EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
CLAIM(S) OF: CASE NO.
Derek Mac Donough UD1582/2012
Rural Resettlement Ireland Limited
UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2007
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Ms. P. Clancy
Members: Mr. T. Gill
Ms H. Henry
heard this claim in Ennis on 27th May 2014
No legal or trade union representation
Mr. Jim Connolly, Chairman, Rural Resettlement Ireland Limited, Kilbaha,
Kilbaha, Kilrush, Co. Clare
The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:-
An unfair dismissal claim was brought to the Tribunal by a field officer of a rural resettlement company after an employment from September 1994 to September 2012. In May 2012 he had been accused of using foul and abusive language to another staff member but he claimed that this complaint was not substantiated. He was made redundant some four months later. JC chairman and founder of the respondent) had declined to give him a reference pending the outcome of outstanding litigation. He felt that the respondent had been vindictive and malicious towards him. He believed that a staff member related to JC had not been redundant but had been on maternity leave. He thought that another employee was probably still working such that he was the only staff member who had been left without work.
JC came to the hearing with AC (his daughter-in-law) and MB (an employee) to give testimony to contest the claimant’s claim that he was the only one who had really been made redundant. It was contended that they, like the claimant, had received a P45 and a statutory redundancy payment such that the respondent was left with only one part-time employee with very long service.
The claimant alleged that the respondent had come into funds such that it should have been possible to keep him in employment.
The Tribunal heard sworn testimony from the claimant, AC and MB. It was clear that JC had indeed been close to AC who was his daughter-in-law and that the respondent had not observed very strict procedures but this did not mean that the claimant’s redundancy was an unfair dismissal. The respondent only kept the employee who had been there the longest. In the course of the hearing the claimant did not deny that there had been a genuine redundancy situation. It was clear that there had been a clash between the claimant and AC but the Tribunal was satisfied that there was authenticity to the claimant’s redundancy.
The claim under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007, fails.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal