Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

An Engineer

An Engineering Design Company

Representatives

In person

Internal Representatives

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Dispute seeking adjudication in accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.

CA-00070783

13/04/2025

The worker was employed as a Senior Energy and Sustainability Engineer. The employment commenced on 2nd January 2025 and ended on 24th January 2025. The worker was also paid one weeks’ pay in lieu of notice entitlements. The dispute referred to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) on 13th April 2025 concerns an alleged unfair dismissal submitted in accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.

The worker contends he was unfairly dismissed. The worker’s position is that he was employed for only three weeks. The worker stated that the reason given for his dismissal was that he was not operating to the level expected of a senior member of staff. The worker contends that there was no period for him to settle into the business and stated that during his employment there were no review meetings relating to perceived performance issues and no opportunity for him to grow in the role and improve his performance. The worker contends that his dismissal after just three weeks of employment for performance related issues was unfair.

The employer stated that the worker did not operate at the level expected of him. The employer’s position is that the worker was employed for a senior role that had limited supervision and support. The employer contends that there were several incidents that led to concerns relating to the worker’s overall suitability for the role. The employer stated that its decision to dismiss the worker during his probationary period was in line with his contract of employment and was reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances.

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

I note in Labour Court Recommendation No:22710 Hamilton Insurance Dac -and- A Worker the Court awarded €10,000 in compensation to a worker who was denied fair procedures when she was dismissed during the probationary period for performance issues that she was unaware of and not given the opportunity to address. The Court in that recommendation stated:

“It is the view of the Court that whenever a worker, including a worker who is on probation, is at risk of the loss of his or her job, it is incumbent on the employer to make the worker aware of the situation and of the reasons. In addition, where the issue arises from the conduct or performance of the worker, he or she should be afforded an opportunity to address the decision maker in his or her defence.

There is no submission before the Court that these basic elements of fair procedure were applied in the case of the worker, and the Court accepts that the sudden termination of her employment without warning has had a significant effect upon her.”

Similarly, in Labour Court Recommendation No: LCR23207 Baxter International v A Worker the Court stated as follows:

“Based on the uncontested submission of the Worker, the Court concludes that the worker was dismissed from his employment without the application of any fair process or procedures. This Court has consistently held that an employer is not relieved of the obligation to act fairly during a probationary period.

The Court recommends that the employer pay the Worker compensation in the amount of €7,500 in recognition that the dismissal of the Worker took place without him being afforded the opportunity to avail of procedures that would have allowed him to put his case prior to him being dismissed.”

It is not disputed in the within referral that the worker was dismissed after three weeks of employment without any process regarding his performance or any opportunity to improve. It is also the case that the worker was unaware until the date of dismissal that his continued employment was at risk.

In all of the circumstances of this dispute, I find that the worker was treated most unfairly by the employer when after three weeks of employment he was dismissed in the circumstances described.

In recognition of the lack of any procedures relating to the termination of the worker’s employment, I find that he was unfairly dismissed, and I recommend that he receive compensation as a result.

Having considered the matter, I find that the worker was unfairly dismissed. I recommend that the employer pay the worker €10,000.00 in compensation.

Unfair dismissal, industrial relations referral