UDD2617

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00039132 (CA-00050879-001)

BACKGROUND:

The Worker appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court on 7th March 2024 in accordance with Section 8A of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 to 2015. A Labour Court hearing took place on 24th February 2026.

The following is the Decision of the Court.

DECISION:

This is an appeal by (the Respondent) against an Adjudication Officer’s Decision ADJ-00039132 CA-00050879-001 given under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2015 (the Act’s) in a claim against Callan Golf Club (the Respondent) that he was unfairly dismissed.  The Adjudication Officer held that he did not have jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

1 Preliminary issue

There were a number of preliminary, issues and the parties agreed that they should be considered first. The first preliminary issue relating to the jurisdiction of the Court is whether or not the Complainant had 12 months service as an employee as required by the Act. In order to establish this the Court was required to look at the nature of the relationship between the parties. It was not disputed that a proposal was put before the Joint Management Committee (JMC) in March 2021 and after that date the Complainant was in the employment of the Respondent until his employment came to an end on 30 November 2021. While the Complainant submits that he commenced employment on 1 December 2020 this is disputed by the Respondent. The Court heard both parties in respect of the arrangements that were in place between 1 December 2020 and 18 March 2021. The Complainant submitted what purported to be a roster showing him rostered for work from 2 December 2020 until 30 November 2021. However, there was no supporting documentation indicating when this roster had been created, where the roster was displayed, when the roster was approved by the JMC or confirmation that the Complainant actually attended for work during the periods shown.

2 Summary of Complainant’s evidence in chief on preliminary issue

The Complainant submitted that he was a playing member of the Respondent. He was a member of the (JMC) and was Club Treasurer in 2020. At a JMC meeting in January 2020 the Complainant and Mr Madigan offered to run the office and the shop on a voluntary basis for four months. At that point in time, he was Treasurer and Mr Madigan was the Captain. The Complainant in his evidence to the Court stated that he believed he entered into a verbal contract with Mr Denis Lawlor who was vice Captain of the Club in June/ July 2020 and incoming Captain. He understood the verbal contract to mean that himself and Mr Madigan would run the club as administrators for the following club accounting year which would run from 1 December 2020 to 30 November 2021. They would operate within the club budget which was an agreed figure of €358,000.

It was his evidence that following that meeting they were appointed to their positions which they commenced on 1 December 2020. In the intervening period they continued running the shop and the office on a voluntary basis. A further meeting was held on 9 February 2021 which was attended by himself, Mr Madigan, Mr Skehane, Mr Lawlor and Mr Kennedy. At that meeting a commitment was given to Mr Kennedy who was considering taking the position of Treasurer that he would be available to Mr Kennedy going forward if he took the position to help with the paperwork and the day-to-day dealings.

On the 18 March 2021 the Complainant and Mr Madigan presented a proposal to the JMC for a Club Manager/ Administrator a copy of which was provided in his submission to the Court. It was his position that this reflected the agreement that had been in place since December 2020. It was the Complainant’s evidence that he did not receive payslips or regular payments but was paid in cash at irregular intervals and given irregular amounts.

Under Cross examination by Ms McGrady BL the Complainant accepted that Mr Lawlor did not become Captain until March 2021. It was put to the Complainant that Mr Lawlor’s evidence will be that he did not have authority to enter into a contract with the Complainant and that Club rule 9.7 clearly states that only the JMC has powers to make appointments. The Complainant stated that he accepts that is what the rule states. He stated that they had informal discussions, but he believed the JMC had the power to retrospectively ratify the arrangement.

It was put to the Complainant that the proposal put to the JMC in March 2021 used future based language. It was put to him that the JMC had no knowledge prior to that meeting of the proposal and that was why the proposal was put that way. The Complainant stated that he disagreed that it was his and Mr Madigan’s idea. Mr Lawlor wanted them in place for his term as Captain.

It was put to the Complainant that any work he carried out prior to 18 March was voluntary and that it would not be unusual for the Treasurer as he was then, to carry out voluntary work. The Complainant accepted that work prior to 1st December 2020 was voluntary, but not the period from 1 December 2020 to 18 March 2021.  The Complainant stated in response to a clarification sought by the Court that he was happy to continue as Treasurer and volunteer during his term as Treasurer. It is his belief that the financial year for the Respondent ends on 30 November and that was why the start date was 1 December 2020. They had discussions with Mr Lawlor in June / July 2020 and finally reached agreement in September /October that they would stay on but in paid positions.

3 Complainants witnesses

Mr Mossie Skehane

Mr Skehan said he was at the 9 February 2021 meeting he was a member of the JMC and incoming vice-captain. The Complainant told him about the meeting. It was his understanding that Mr Kennedy had reservations about becoming Treasurer and it was agreed that Mr Collins and Mr Madigan would do the work including the paperwork and if he took up the Treasurer role Mr Kennedy would just have to sign off on it. He understood that Mr Kennedy wanted them to carry on the role they were doing and prepare the accounts and do all the work the Treasurer would normally do. He recalled Mr Kennedy indicating that he would have reservations taking the Treasurer role if he did not get help.

 Mr Joesph Madigan

Mr Madigan stated that he thought it might have been Denis Lawlor who called the meeting on 9 February 2021. He understood that the meeting was called because Mr Kennedy wanted assurances that they would be in the office to do the paperwork for JMC and other meetings. It was his understanding that Mr Kennedy wanted confirmation of same.

4 Summary of Respondent’s submission on the preliminary issue.

Ms McGrady BL submitted that the Complainant was a playing member of the Respondent’s Golf Club and was Treasurer in 2020 a voluntary position. At a JMC meeting on 22 January 2020 the Complainant and Mr Madigan offered to run the office and shop on a voluntary basis for four months.

On 18 March 2021, the Complainant and Mr Madigan presented a proposal to the JMC for a Club Manager/ Administrator role. The proposal stated, “The post shall attract a yearly total payment which will include expenses and a stipend to not exceed €32,000”.  The then ladies captain sought a week’s adjournment to consider the proposal, but the Complainant stated that if they were not appointed, they would walk out immediately. The matter was then discussed at the meeting the minutes of which record as follows.

“The JMC received a presentation from Denis Collins regarding the operation of the Management and Administration of the Club. This was a detailed account of the proposed undertakings and what it entailed with the roles and responsibilities going forward.  This matter was debated for some period of time and clarifications were sought and given before a vote was undertaken on the matter, the result was fourteen in favour and one against the proposal it was deemed to be agreed by the JMC”

The proposal was implemented with effect from 18 March 2021 and came to an end in November 2021.

 In and around 24/25 July 2021 the then Treasurer of the Club met with the Complainant to discuss claiming the stipend/ expenses that had been authorised. He was informed that a sum of €14,000 had already been drawn down and had been approved by the accountant. However, this transpired not to be the case. The payment was taken in cash and not reflected in the accounts. The Treasurer then instructed the Complainant not to take any further payments until they were properly set up and approved. The Complainant indicated that he was entitled to payment from December 2020 but was informed by the Treasurer that the arrangement had not commenced until 18 March 2021. A meeting was held on 30 August 2021 in relation to the accounts and it was re-affirmed that the arrangement was effective from 18 March 2021.

A further meeting was held on 7 September 2021 where it transpired that despite the Treasurers instruction in July, the Complainant had made a further payment to himself in August 2021. In and around 21 September 2021 the Treasurer resigned followed shortly after by the resignation of the lady’s representative on the Executive Finance Committee (EFC) In November 2021. The Complainant resigned from his Administrator position and his resignation took effect from 30 November 2021.

5 Respondents witnesses

Mr Denis Lawlor

Mr Lawlor stated that he was Vice Captain in 2020 and was the incoming Captain for 2021. He became Captain on 11 March 2021 at the AGM.  In June/ July 2020, he had discussions with the Complainant about how the club would operate going forward. These were informal discussions in the club house or on the course.

The Club re-opened fully in April 2021 but was partially open before that. In response to a question from Counsel the witness stated that the Vice Captain had no particulars powers. He had a vote at the JMC and a vote at the EFC. The Captain chaired the JMC and had a vote.  It was the witness’s evidence that to employ somebody, you had to abide by the constitution which would require a proposal to the JMC and the remuneration to be agreed by the EFC. A sub committee would be set up to interview and then make a recommendation for discussion at the JMC. It was his evidence that no individual could employ someone.

In response to the question did you make an offer of work, it was his evidence that no offer of employment was made. There was a discussion about the provision of a suite of services subject to the approval of the JMC.  It was his recollection that the purpose of the meeting in February was to assure Mr Kennedy as incoming Treasurer that there would be provision for the services and carrying out the paperwork if he took on the role.  Mr Kennedy was given assurances that there would be somebody available to do the day-to-day duties and he would not have to do them.

Mr Kennedy took up the role at the AGM on 11 March 2021 where he was formally appointed. He accepted that the Complainants version of the document that went to the JMC on 18 March 2O21 was the correct version.  It was his evidence that the proposal came about by way of a discussion between himself and the Complainant and that it was envisaged that it would be caried out by two or three people. There were some discussions and he asked that the stipend/ fees would be included. These discussions took place before March 2021.  ns presented the proposal to the JMC on the 18 March 2021 and there was a lengthy discussion which culminated in a vote in favour of the proposal.  The witness confirmed that he did not approve any payments prior to the submission to the JMC on 18 March 2021.

In response to questions under cross examination from the Complainant, the witness stated that he did not recall finances being discussed in terms of their July engagement. Finance was first raised before the submission was made to the JMC to show the cost of the role. It was his evidence that it was for the provision of service for a 12-month period from the date it was approved 18 March 2021. He stated that he would have flagged in earlier discussions that the proposal would have to go to the JMC.  In June and July 2020, it was still a notional idea he could not recall a specific figure being mentioned. It was envisaged that three people would be involved and that as it was a voluntary post their costs would be defrayed.

 Mr John Kennedy

In his evidence in chief Mr Kennedy stated that the meeting on 9 February 2021 was in relation to him taking on the role of Treasurer at the AGM in March 2021. He had reservations about taking on the roll because of his own commitments. It was an informal meeting, and it was the first time he spoke to the Complainant about his concerns.

It was put to him under cross examination that the Complainant was going to assist him and get him up and running on the accounts package. The witness stated that he was self-employed and was familiar with the package and that the Complainant had not really helped him. He stated that he found the accounts were not being used in the way they were supposed to be used.

6 Discussion and decision

It is not disputed that the Complainant and Mr Madigan carried out the role on a voluntary basis from January 2020 to November 2020 and that from March 2021 the JMC approved the roles, and they were no longer operating in a voluntary capacity. At that point in time their terms of office as Captain and Treasurer had both expired and their replacements had taken up office on foot of the AGM on 11 March 2021.  The parties also agree that a proposal was brought to the JMC on 18 March 2021 and this was the first time the JMC formally became aware of the proposal. That proposal referenced a stipend to be paid for the carrying out of the duties. There was no mention in the proposal of a retrospective payment to a period prior to 18 March 2021. The minutes of the meeting do not reflect any discussion around such a payment.  Rule 9.7 of the Respondent’s handbook states

 “The Joint Management Committee shall have power;

1. a) To appoint paid employees, terms and conditions to be approved by the Executive Finance Committee.
2. b) to terminate such appointments
3. c) to appoint substitutes from time to time.”

The proposition put before the Court by the Complainant was that himself and Mr Madigan the out outgoing Captain came to an arrangement with the incoming Captain  that  they would be  paid to do work that they had voluntarily being doing from 1st December 2020 and that it was within the gift of the Vice-Captain, as he was at that time, to enter into such an arrangement. This proposition was hotly disputed by Mr Lawlor who was the Vice-Captain at that time. It is clear from rule 9.7 that such an arrangement would be contrary to the rules of the Club. If such an arrangement had been entered into no logical reason was put forward as to why it wasn’t mentioned in the proposal that went to the JMC on 18 March 2021 that this was already in being and had been in place in December 2020.

The Court found the evidence of Mr Lawlor that there had been chats about such an arrangement and the coming to fruition of those conversations were the proposals put to the JMC on 18 March 2021 which was immediately after the AGM and the Complainants and Mr Madigan’s terms of office had expired to be compelling. This explanation unlike the proposition put by the Complainant and Mr Madigan was in line with the Club rules and there were written records to support same. Taking all of the above into consideration the Court finds that the Complainant was not employed by the Respondent during the period 1 December 2020 to 17 March 2021 and therefore is excluded from taking a case under the Unfair Dismissal Act by reason of section 2 (1) (a) which states

“an employee (other than a person referred to in section 4 of this Act) who is dismissed, who, at the date of his dismissal, had less than one year’s continuous service with the employer who dismissed him.”

The appeal fails the decision of the Adjudication officer is upheld

The Court so determines.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Louise O'Donnell
AM	______________________
12/05/2026	Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ms Áine Maunsell, Court Secretary.