EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
Midland Milk Traders Limited
UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS 1977 TO 2007
ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT 1997
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Mr. J. Lucey
Members: Mr. J. Hennessy
Ms S. Kelly
heard this claim at Thurles on 13th June 2016
Claimant: Ms Lauren Tennyson BL instructed by Mr. Eugene T. Tormey, O'Connor, Tormey & Co., Solicitors, Slievenamon Road, Thurles, Co. Tipperary
Respondent: Mr. Paudie O'Mahony, Babington Clarke & Mooney, Solicitors, 48 South Mall, Cork
The claim under the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997, was not prosecuted.
The Tribunal heard evidence from LC a director of the Respondent. He explained that the Claimant worked there for ten years. The Claimant worked as a driver. It was a legal requirement that a driver was required to have a class C driving license and a CPC certificate.
A class B license is for a car or a van and a class C is for a truck of which the Claimant drove a 7.5 ton truck. The Claimant did not drive a car for the company. He understood that the Claimant had a class C license; the Claimant never informed him that he had only a B license.
The Claimant tendered his notice on 01st August 2014, he gave one month’s notice to finish on 06th September 2014. The Claimant and other drivers were required to do a CPC course. The Claimant told him that at this stage of his life he was not going to do a CPC course. The Claimant then gave him a month’s notice. This was on or about 01st August 2014.
He engaged a relief driver who commenced on 17th August 2014. The Claimant showed the new driver around, and showed him what to do. The Claimant worked his notice up to 06th September 2014. His form p45 indicates the date of 13th November because the Claimant had accrued holidays and the p45 was issued after his holidays.
The witness re-iterated that the Claimant never told him that he only had a class B license. The Claimant never asked him on 01st August to have his driving hours reduced.
The Tribunal heard from a witness DS who told the Tribunal that the Claimant told him that he was leaving the Respondent. The Claimant gave him keys and wished him the best of luck.
The Tribunal heard evidence from AD who worked part time in the Respondent office. She knew the Claimant as she met him a couple of times a week. The Claimant made her aware that he was handing in his notice.
The Tribunal heard evidence from FoN. He told the Tribunal that he was not an employee of the Respondent. He had a conversation with the Claimant who told him that he was thinking of leaving. That he was offered a job delivering eggs and that it was for three days a week which would suit him because of the shorter hours.
The Tribunal heard evidence from ToB who is a self-employed agent. He told the Tribunal that the Claimant told him that he was sick of the long hours and packing it in.
The Tribunal heard evidence from EC who was a former director of the Respondent. He had spoken to the Claimant in August 2014. The Claimant told him that he was finishing work; that he was handing in his notice.
The Tribunal heard evidence from the Claimant who explained that he commenced working in the Respondent in November 2000 in a sales delivery role, driving a ford transit van. He had a B license. Circa 2004 he changed vehicles to a small rigid truck that was over 3.5 tonnes because they needed to carry more milk. He worked six days a week from 3.00 a.m. and could work up to 5.00 p.m.
In August 2014 he had a conversation with LC. He asked LC that his hours be reduced. LC told him that he would revert to him and he did. LC told him that he could not reduce his hours.
Regarding holidays he normally took the first two weeks in September because of the All Ireland. He did not tell LC that he was resigning. He had a conversation that to use up his holidays that he would take a third week in September; LC told him he could take three weeks if he liked so he said he would. While he was on holidays DS did his route. DS was not replacing him because he was leaving; DS was just there to fill his job while he was on holidays.
He received his form p45 in the post circa 20th to 30th September 2014. He rang LC to ask him why he was getting his form p45. He told LC that he had not resigned. LC said that he would talk to the accountant and get back to him. He did not get back to him. The Claimant told the Tribunal that he could not understand why he got his form p45. He did have conversations about his hours and that he was sick of the hours he did not say he was leaving.
The Claimant gave evidence as to his loss.
The Tribunal having heard the evidence adduced makes that following determination. The Claimant did not have the proper license or qualification for the position. The Tribunal unanimously determines that the claim under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007, fails.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal