EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
CLAIM(S) OF: CASE NO.
Employee - claimant
Employer - respondent
UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2007
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Mr. D. Mac Carthy S C
Members: Mr. T. O'Sullivan
Mr S. Mackell
heard this claim at Dublin on 24th January 2014
Claimant(s): Mr. James J. Hally, Solicitor, "Eldon", Main Street,
Tramore, Co. Waterford
Respondent(s):Ms Caitriona Forsythe, IBEC, Confederation House, 84-86
Lower Baggot Street, Dublin 2
The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:-
The claimant told the Tribunal that he commenced employment with the respondent as a recruitment consultant on the 17 February 2010. Prior to this he had fourteen years’ experience in the recruitment industry. His salary with the respondent was €30,000.00 per annum. On the 17/18 December 2010 he was assaulted while on a Christmas night out from work and as a result he sustained serious head injuries. He was out of work for a year due to the nature of the injuries.
He returned to work on the 12 January 2012. He was due to have a conference call with HR following his return to work but this never transpired. He worked half days for the first week. He asked HR if it was possible to attend a refresher course. GN (his manager) told him that it was not possible. His desk was beside a laser jet printer which was constantly in use. He requested a headset on four occasions so that he could block out the noise.
FD (senior manager) asked him why he decided to return to a pressurised job and if she was him that she would look for another job. He had a great year with the respondent in 2010 and he was asked to move to a city location.
He was asked to hand in his mobile phone and all his clients had his mobile number. GN asked him to change his shoes and wear rubber soled shoes. The office was re-organised deliberately because of him.
He was handed targets and KPI (key performer indicators) and there was no readjustment period. The respondent was aware of his concerns. He spoke about his injuries and he thought that his colleagues would be interested in hearing what had happened to him. He was told not to mention the assault to clients.
On Thursday 26 January 2012, the day before he submitted his resignation he attended a meeting regarding sales. Two of his colleagues left the meeting and stated that it was a waste of time. He told GN that he was not being allowed to do his job and he was being micromanaged. He handed in his notice on the 27 January 2012 and left fifteen minutes later.
He established his own business in 2012. He has been off medication for a year. He did not drink alcohol for a year and cycled every day.
In cross examination he agreed that he was given a contract of employment but he had not read it. He did not know if he should raise his grievance with the respondent. He was in a relationship with FD for five months. He raised an issue of sitting beside a printer on the day he returned to work. He met GN daily, they had informal conversations and had a good working relationship.. GN was best friends with FD and he told GN before he resigned that he had been in a relationship with FD. GN was shocked and he felt that GN may have been manipulated into getting rid of him.
He was not given time to settle back to work and he was pushed into resigning. He believed that there was pressure on GN to get him out of the respondent. He stated that it would have been embarrassing if it was made known that he had been in a relationship with a senior manager in the respondent.
The claimant had a most unfortunate experience in that he sustained very serious injuries by being assaulted. This resulted in the claimant being out of work for a year. The claimant made a big effort to recover, took exercises and did other things. The claimant returned to work a year after the assault and he was certified fit.
The Tribunal found it difficult to understand the specifics of the claimant’s case. In a case for constructive dismissal the claimant must take some steps to inform the employer of the problem to give the opportunity for the employer to resolve the matter. The claimant did not use the grievance procedure and he said that he was aware of it. The claimant did not make his complaints know until his last day in work. The claimant just left his employment and he did not follow any procedures.
The Tribunal fully understands that the claimant suffered a serious injury. The claimant has failed in his case of constructive dismissal and his claim under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007 fails.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal