A recent Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) decision confirms that an unfair dismissal will not always lead to the employer being ordered to award compensation to the dismissed employee. Let’s take a closer look.
Types of redress
Three remedies are available to dismissed employees under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 (the Acts): -
- compensation
- re-engagement, or
- reinstatement
Statistically, most complainants seek compensation as their preferred remedy. In situations where the working relationship has irreparably broken down, an award of compensation is the only real viable option.
Compensation limits
Adjudication Officers and the Labour Court have jurisdiction to make awards of compensation (for financial loss) of up to 104 weeks’ remuneration. The complainant must demonstrate that s/he has been actively looking for alternative employment since the date of dismissal. This is known as mitigating one’s losses.
Case study
In a recent WRC decision, the Adjudication Officer heard evidence of how the relationship between the employer and the complainant had irretrievably broken down after a decision was made not to sell the employer’s beauty salon to the complainant.
Evidence was heard detailing how the complainant reacted to the disappointment of not acquiring the salon by approaching clients to deter them from using the services of the employer, deceitfully recording the employer on a mobile phone, spreading false rumours about the employer and intimidating the employer.
Unfair dismissal
The complainant was dismissed on the 17
th October 2017. It was quickly established that the dismissal was not carried out in accordance with the principles of natural justice or best practice as set out in
Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures and constituted an unfair dismissal under the Acts
.
The crux of the case
The question to be determined by the Adjudication Officer was “
whether or not the obvious lack of proper procedural procedures in October 2017 were fatal to any defence against an Unfair Dismissal claim.” The Adjudication Officer noted that in the absence of any proper disciplinary procedures, the dismissal was procedurally unfair as the standards under the
Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures “were completely ignored and the basic tenets of natural justice in an employment situation were ignored.”
Employee’s role in her own dismissal
The Adjudication Officer acknowledged the contribution of the complainant’s behaviour to the dismissal,
“I also came strongly to the view that the open and acknowledged negative activities of the complainant over the course of the Spring/Summer of 2017 contributed 100% to the dismissal….”
No compensation
In a rare but welcome decision for the employer, the Adjudication Officer made no award of compensation to reflect the employee’s hand in her own dismissal.
Each verdict will be determined on its own facts
While employers should always use the procedures set out in the
Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures and act in line with their company policies to resolve disciplinary matters, it provides some comfort to employers to know that the WRC and Labour Court will always take the conduct of an employee into consideration when determining the appropriate remedy to award under the Acts.
To learn how you can protect your business against unfair dismissal claims please call our 24-hour advice line on 0818 923 923
