Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) - RECENT Decisions & judgements
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00011878
Complainant receives compensation of €10,000 for unfair dismissal
The Complainant was employed from 1st April 2015 until the employment terminated on 29th September 2017 and alleged that he had been unfairly dismissed.
On 20th September 2017, the Complainant was requested to attend a meeting with his Supervisor on 29th September 2017. At this meeting he was informed that his services were no longer required. He was advised that his final salary and commission would be offset against his company car loan. On 2nd October 2017, the Complainant received a letter from a named Manager of the Respondent dated 28th September 2017. In this letter the Respondent outlined a number of purported reasons as to why his employment was terminated. In his previous annual reviews, no issues had been raised with him in relation to his performance.
He then received an email from the same Manager on 2nd October 2017 informing him that due to financial circumstances his position was made redundant with immediate effect, and in a follow up email he was informed of the redundancy package. In this email, the Respondent also advised of a number of allegations in respect of the Complainant’s work. On the same day the Complainant was made redundant, the Respondent announced it had appointed a Sales Manager for the Republic of Ireland effective from 1st October 2017.
The Complainant referred his complaint to the WRC on 13th November 2017. However, by letter dated 14th December 2017 from the Respondent to the WRC, it stated that the employment was terminated for a stated reason and that this constituted gross misconduct. The Respondent has proffered two diametrically opposed explanations for the termination of the Complainant’s employment. The Complainant argued that he had been summarily dismissed, and he had never been provided with the Respondent’s Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures and his dismissal was contrary to fair procedures and natural justice.
The Complainant stated that he had been in receipt of Jobseekers Benefit. He was requested to provide a statement from the Department to confirm the dates he had been in receipt of this Benefit. He did not do so. The Complainant also stated that he had commenced work on a Self- Employed basis effective from 14th February 2018. He was asked to provide evidence of this but did not do so.
Contrary to the above, the Respondent stated that the Complainant had been employed as a Business Development Manager in April 2015. He was provided with a letter of appointment and a Contract of Employment on 6th March 2015.
In April 2015, the Complainant was hired and was the sole employee of the Irish subsidiary. It was loss making in all months with the exception of 5 months since the Complainant’s employment. Evidence of emails in July and August 2017 between the Complainant and the Respondent were provided to the Hearing in relation to the loss-making situation of the Company. The Respondent made a business decision to make the Complainant redundant and the Respondent gave the rights to the products to a Sole Distributor, who remain in existence and this Sole Distributor was named at the Hearing. The Respondent stated that the Complainant was never replaced and the Sole Distributor remains.
The Complainant was informed of the termination of the employment by email dated 2nd October 2017. The Respondent also in this email offered the Complainant the car as full and final settlement to take account also of any wages due for September 2017, and expenses. There was an outstanding Company Car Loan of €12,555.12 at the time of his redundancy. The Complainant was paid €8044.56. Both Parties confirmed that the Complainant met his named Manager on 29th September 2017 at which he was informed his employment was to be terminated. He was not informed by the Respondent at that meeting the reasons as to why his employment was terminated.
Then on 2nd October 2017 the named Managing Director sent a letter dated 28th September 2017 setting out reasons relating to his performance which the Respondent was now stating was the reason for the termination. However, the Adjudicator notes that in this letter the Managing Director concludes with the following “you have kindly offered to meet up with the people taking over from 1st October 2017 and do an official handover…”
This is followed in an email dated 2nd October 2017 again from the named Managing Director which goes on to state in part as follows “… unfortunately, due to financial circumstances your position with (named) has been made redundant with immediate effect…”. However, in a further email of the same date from the Managing Director sets out a redundancy package which offered the Complainant - his car in full and final settlement to take account of any payments for the month of September 2017 for salary, commission and expenses.
However, in a letter dated 29th September 2017 the same named Managing Director states as follows “As and from 1st October 2017, I am delighted to inform you that (named) have appointed (named) as Sales Manager for the Republic of Ireland”.
Thus, it is unclear from all these contradictory letters and emails as to why the Complainant’s employment was terminated. However, regardless of the reason, an Employee who is being dismissed by the Employer is entitled to fair procedures in relation to the termination. Both Parties confirmed that the Complainant had been provided with a written statement of Terms and Conditions of Employment but the Complainant had not been provided with the Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures of the Company.
The Adjudicator found that the Complainant was not afforded fair procedures in relation to the Termination in breach of S.I. 146/2000. Additionally, the Adjudicator found that the Complainant had been unfairly dismissed. On the basis of the evidence, the above findings and in accordance with Section 8(1) (c) of the Act the Adjudicator declares the complaint of unfair dismissal is well founded. The Adjudicator directed the Respondent to pay the Complainant compensation of €10,000.00 within 42 days of the date of this decision.
The sum of €3,000 is awarded to the Complainant as a result of discrimination in the workplace
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00014091
In this case, the Complainant submits he was discriminated against by the Respondent on the grounds of disability. He was employed by the Respondent from 26th of February 2018 to 28th of February 2018. He advised a colleague on the 27th February 2018, that he was too tired to work a roster which required him to work through breakfast, lunch and dinner shifts.
He was called to a meeting with the Restaurant Manager - Ms. L on the 28th of February 2018, where he notified her that he was too tired to work such shifts and long hours were too difficult for him due to a disability. He further explained to Ms. L that he was unable to take his medication properly and was told that those were the shifts and no exceptions could be made.
The Respondent submits that the reason Complainant resigned on the 28th of February 2018 was because he was unable for the hours as he finds the shifts too long and early mornings as well as late nights were too difficult for him. The role did not suit him; therefore, he left his employment.
The Respondent claims that at the end of the meeting, the Complainant stated the hours were affecting his medicine routine and as she was about to exit the room, he stated he was HIV positive.
The relevant law in this case is Equality Acts, 1998 to 2015. It is submitted by the Complainant that he is a person with a disability, within the meaning of section 2 of the Employment Equality Acts this is defined as:
“(a) the total or partial absence of a person’s bodily or mental functions, including the absence of a part of a person’s body,
(b) the presence in the body of organisms causing, or likely to cause, chronic disease or illness,
(c) the malfunction, malformation or disfigurement of a part of a person’s body,
(d) a condition or malfunction which results in a person learning differently from a person without the condition or malfunction, or
(e) a condition, illness or disease which affects a person’s thought processes, perception of reality, emotions or judgement or which results in disturbed behaviour, and shall be taken to include a disability which exists at present, or which previously existed but no longer exists, or which may exist in the future or which is imputed to a person”.
Section 16 (3) of the Acts, sets out the obligations and requirements on Employers to take appropriate measures, where needed in a particular case, to enable a person with a disability have access to, participate in or advance in employment. It requires an Employer to make a proper and adequate assessment of the situation before taking a decision which is to the detriment of an Employee with a disability.
The Respondent, once aware that the Complainant’s reason for resigning was due to his disability was obliged to make further enquiries into the extent of the disability and to ascertain whether he might be able to do the job if he was afforded reasonable accommodation for his disability. Accordingly, the Complainant was discriminated against by the Respondent in respect of a failure to provide him with reasonable accommodation for his disability.
Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2015 requires the decision to be made in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under section 82 of the Act. Therefore, the sum of €3,000 is awarded to the Complainant for the distress suffered by him as a result of the discrimination.
Complainant receives compensation of €10,000 for unfair dismissal
The Complainant was employed from 1st April 2015 until the employment terminated on 29th September 2017 and alleged that he had been unfairly dismissed.
On 20th September 2017, the Complainant was requested to attend a meeting with his Supervisor on 29th September 2017. At this meeting he was informed that his services were no longer required. He was advised that his final salary and commission would be offset against his company car loan. On 2nd October 2017, the Complainant received a letter from a named Manager of the Respondent dated 28th September 2017. In this letter the Respondent outlined a number of purported reasons as to why his employment was terminated. In his previous annual reviews, no issues had been raised with him in relation to his performance.
He then received an email from the same Manager on 2nd October 2017 informing him that due to financial circumstances his position was made redundant with immediate effect, and in a follow up email he was informed of the redundancy package. In this email, the Respondent also advised of a number of allegations in respect of the Complainant’s work. On the same day the Complainant was made redundant, the Respondent announced it had appointed a Sales Manager for the Republic of Ireland effective from 1st October 2017.
The Complainant referred his complaint to the WRC on 13th November 2017. However, by letter dated 14th December 2017 from the Respondent to the WRC, it stated that the employment was terminated for a stated reason and that this constituted gross misconduct. The Respondent has proffered two diametrically opposed explanations for the termination of the Complainant’s employment. The Complainant argued that he had been summarily dismissed, and he had never been provided with the Respondent’s Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures and his dismissal was contrary to fair procedures and natural justice.
The Complainant stated that he had been in receipt of Jobseekers Benefit. He was requested to provide a statement from the Department to confirm the dates he had been in receipt of this Benefit. He did not do so. The Complainant also stated that he had commenced work on a Self- Employed basis effective from 14th February 2018. He was asked to provide evidence of this but did not do so.
Contrary to the above, the Respondent stated that the Complainant had been employed as a Business Development Manager in April 2015. He was provided with a letter of appointment and a Contract of Employment on 6th March 2015.
In April 2015, the Complainant was hired and was the sole employee of the Irish subsidiary. It was loss making in all months with the exception of 5 months since the Complainant’s employment. Evidence of emails in July and August 2017 between the Complainant and the Respondent were provided to the Hearing in relation to the loss-making situation of the Company. The Respondent made a business decision to make the Complainant redundant and the Respondent gave the rights to the products to a Sole Distributor, who remain in existence and this Sole Distributor was named at the Hearing. The Respondent stated that the Complainant was never replaced and the Sole Distributor remains.
The Complainant was informed of the termination of the employment by email dated 2nd October 2017. The Respondent also in this email offered the Complainant the car as full and final settlement to take account also of any wages due for September 2017, and expenses. There was an outstanding Company Car Loan of €12,555.12 at the time of his redundancy. The Complainant was paid €8044.56. Both Parties confirmed that the Complainant met his named Manager on 29th September 2017 at which he was informed his employment was to be terminated. He was not informed by the Respondent at that meeting the reasons as to why his employment was terminated.
Then on 2nd October 2017 the named Managing Director sent a letter dated 28th September 2017 setting out reasons relating to his performance which the Respondent was now stating was the reason for the termination. However, the Adjudicator notes that in this letter the Managing Director concludes with the following “you have kindly offered to meet up with the people taking over from 1st October 2017 and do an official handover…”
This is followed in an email dated 2nd October 2017 again from the named Managing Director which goes on to state in part as follows “… unfortunately, due to financial circumstances your position with (named) has been made redundant with immediate effect…”. However, in a further email of the same date from the Managing Director sets out a redundancy package which offered the Complainant - his car in full and final settlement to take account of any payments for the month of September 2017 for salary, commission and expenses.
However, in a letter dated 29th September 2017 the same named Managing Director states as follows “As and from 1st October 2017, I am delighted to inform you that (named) have appointed (named) as Sales Manager for the Republic of Ireland”.
Thus, it is unclear from all these contradictory letters and emails as to why the Complainant’s employment was terminated. However, regardless of the reason, an Employee who is being dismissed by the Employer is entitled to fair procedures in relation to the termination. Both Parties confirmed that the Complainant had been provided with a written statement of Terms and Conditions of Employment but the Complainant had not been provided with the Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures of the Company.
The Adjudicator found that the Complainant was not afforded fair procedures in relation to the Termination in breach of S.I. 146/2000. Additionally, the Adjudicator found that the Complainant had been unfairly dismissed. On the basis of the evidence, the above findings and in accordance with Section 8(1) (c) of the Act the Adjudicator declares the complaint of unfair dismissal is well founded. The Adjudicator directed the Respondent to pay the Complainant compensation of €10,000.00 within 42 days of the date of this decision.
The sum of €3,000 is awarded to the Complainant as a result of discrimination in the workplace
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00014091
In this case, the Complainant submits he was discriminated against by the Respondent on the grounds of disability. He was employed by the Respondent from 26th of February 2018 to 28th of February 2018. He advised a colleague on the 27th February 2018, that he was too tired to work a roster which required him to work through breakfast, lunch and dinner shifts.
He was called to a meeting with the Restaurant Manager - Ms. L on the 28th of February 2018, where he notified her that he was too tired to work such shifts and long hours were too difficult for him due to a disability. He further explained to Ms. L that he was unable to take his medication properly and was told that those were the shifts and no exceptions could be made.
The Respondent submits that the reason Complainant resigned on the 28th of February 2018 was because he was unable for the hours as he finds the shifts too long and early mornings as well as late nights were too difficult for him. The role did not suit him; therefore, he left his employment.
The Respondent claims that at the end of the meeting, the Complainant stated the hours were affecting his medicine routine and as she was about to exit the room, he stated he was HIV positive.
The relevant law in this case is Equality Acts, 1998 to 2015. It is submitted by the Complainant that he is a person with a disability, within the meaning of section 2 of the Employment Equality Acts this is defined as:
“(a) the total or partial absence of a person’s bodily or mental functions, including the absence of a part of a person’s body,
(b) the presence in the body of organisms causing, or likely to cause, chronic disease or illness,
(c) the malfunction, malformation or disfigurement of a part of a person’s body,
(d) a condition or malfunction which results in a person learning differently from a person without the condition or malfunction, or
(e) a condition, illness or disease which affects a person’s thought processes, perception of reality, emotions or judgement or which results in disturbed behaviour, and shall be taken to include a disability which exists at present, or which previously existed but no longer exists, or which may exist in the future or which is imputed to a person”.
Section 16 (3) of the Acts, sets out the obligations and requirements on Employers to take appropriate measures, where needed in a particular case, to enable a person with a disability have access to, participate in or advance in employment. It requires an Employer to make a proper and adequate assessment of the situation before taking a decision which is to the detriment of an Employee with a disability.
The Respondent, once aware that the Complainant’s reason for resigning was due to his disability was obliged to make further enquiries into the extent of the disability and to ascertain whether he might be able to do the job if he was afforded reasonable accommodation for his disability. Accordingly, the Complainant was discriminated against by the Respondent in respect of a failure to provide him with reasonable accommodation for his disability.
Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2015 requires the decision to be made in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under section 82 of the Act. Therefore, the sum of €3,000 is awarded to the Complainant for the distress suffered by him as a result of the discrimination.
Note on WRC:
The establishment of the Workplace Relations Commission on the 1st October 2015 is the most radical restructuring of employment legislation over the last 30 years. Organisations are encouraged to understand all facets of the WRC, how it now operates and what to expect when required to defend a claim at the third parties.
The establishment of the Workplace Relations Commission has resulted in the combined functions of the Labour Relations Commission, Rights Commissioner Service, the Equality Tribunal, the Employment Appeals Tribunal and the National Employment Rights Authority (NERA).
In addition to this the Labour Court has been reconfigured in order to hear appeals.
The strategic aims of the new Workplace Relations Commission include an independent, effective and impartial workplace relations service, a more workable means of redress within a reasonable timeframe and an overall reduction in costs. The new Workplace Relations Commission is also anticipated to be more centralised, in terms of maintaining a database of case information, the end result bring a better service for both Employers and Employees and a much more streamlined, simplified process.
The establishment of the Workplace Relations Commission on the 1st October 2015 is the most radical restructuring of employment legislation over the last 30 years. Organisations are encouraged to understand all facets of the WRC, how it now operates and what to expect when required to defend a claim at the third parties.
The establishment of the Workplace Relations Commission has resulted in the combined functions of the Labour Relations Commission, Rights Commissioner Service, the Equality Tribunal, the Employment Appeals Tribunal and the National Employment Rights Authority (NERA).
In addition to this the Labour Court has been reconfigured in order to hear appeals.
The strategic aims of the new Workplace Relations Commission include an independent, effective and impartial workplace relations service, a more workable means of redress within a reasonable timeframe and an overall reduction in costs. The new Workplace Relations Commission is also anticipated to be more centralised, in terms of maintaining a database of case information, the end result bring a better service for both Employers and Employees and a much more streamlined, simplified process.
Adare Human Resource Management is one of Ireland’s leading Employment Law and Human Resource Management Consultancies. Our HR & Employment Law Support Services include:
www.adarehrm.ie
- Advice on all Employment Law, Industrial Relations and HR queries or issues
- Review, Development and Implementation of Contracts of Employment and Employee Policies and Procedures
- Management and Employee Training - Dignity at Work, Anti-Harassment and Sexual Harassment, Conducting Disciplinary Meetings
- Investigations - independent investigations on behalf of Organisations in line with the relevant legislation and codes of practice
- Organisational Management or Change Management Initiatives – including review / development of Performance Appraisal / Management Systems and Organisational Development
www.adarehrm.ie
