Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A Worker

An Employer

Representatives

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969

IR - SC - 00003491

01/12/2024

The worker alleges that she was dismissed from her employment in the absence of any procedures. The respondent alleges that the employment came to an end when the lady the work was covering for returned after maternity leave.

The worker commenced employment with the Respondent in February 2024. She was provided with a contract of employment setting out her hours of work, place of work, and other relevant terms and conditions. The contract provided for a six-month probationary period, extendable to a maximum of eleven months.

The worker attended two review meetings during her employment: the first after three months and the second after six months. At no point during these meetings, or at any other time, was she informed of any concerns regarding her performance or conduct.

In November 2024, while on holiday in Portugal with her family, the worker received a text message from NG asking her to check her email. The email informed her that her employment was being terminated on the basis that the employee she was allegedly covering for was returning from maternity leave. The worker maintains that she had never been informed that her role was to provide maternity cover, and her contract contained no reference to this arrangement.

There were no disciplinary issues during the course of her employment. A few weeks prior to the termination of her employment, her working hours were reduced from 9:00 a.m.–2:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m.–1:00 p.m. due to a reported decline in attendance numbers.

The worker was very distressed by the manner in which her employment was terminated, particularly as she was notified while abroad on holiday. She secured alternative employment approximately one month later.

In or around early January 2024, a member of the Respondent’s staff was due to commence maternity leave. The Respondent asserts that, at a meeting prior to the commencement of the worker’s employment, she was informed that her role was to provide cover for an employee going on maternity leave. This point is disputed by the worker.

The employee on maternity leave extended her leave on several occasions. As a result, the Respondent formed the view that she might not return to work. However, while the worker was on leave in Portugal, the employee on maternity leave notified the Respondent of her intention to return to work the following week.

The Respondent states that it would have preferred to inform the worker of the termination in person. However, as she was abroad at the time, the Respondent communicated the decision by email. The worker was paid all monies due up to the date of termination.

Since the worker’s departure, the Respondent states that business numbers have declined year on year. The after-school service has since ceased operating entirely. The workforce has reduced from seven employees to three.

In response to the worker’s assertion that her contract did not specify that the role was maternity cover, the Respondent accepts that the contract did not expressly state this.

In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.

The worker began employment in February 2024 under a contract that did not mention maternity cover. She received no performance concerns and had no disciplinary issues. While on holiday in November 2024, she was informed by email that her employment was terminated because the employee she was allegedly covering for was returning from maternity leave—an arrangement she disputes being told about.

The employer maintains she was informed the role was maternity cover, though this was not stated in her contract. The termination occurred when the employee on maternity leave confirmed her return. The employer also cites declining business and confirms all wages due were paid.

In all of the circumstances I am making the following recommendations:

1.       It is recommended that the organisation ensures that all employee contracts are thoroughly reviewed for accuracy and clarity. The contracts should be transparent, providing employees with a clear understanding of their rights, responsibilities, and the terms of their employment. This will not only prevent misunderstandings but also promote a positive and fair working environment

2.       It is further recommended that the organisation establishes and implements formal procedures for the dismissal of employees. These procedures should be fair, consistent, and in compliance with relevant laws and regulations. A clear, step-by-step process will ensure that dismissals are handled professionally and transparently, reducing the risk of disputes and ensuring fairness for all parties involved.

Dismissal, maternity leave, specific purpose contract, procedures.