Aideen Barrett v Nicolette O'Mahony t/a Body Raze [Employment Appeals Tribunal]

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)
• Judgment Date: 05 October 2010
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2010] 10 JIEC 0501
• Date: 05 October 2010

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

Representation:

Claimant: Ms Cliona Kenny, Ernest J. Cantillon & Co. Solicitors, 39 South Mall, Cork

Respondent: Frank Nyhan & Associates Solicitors, 11 Market Square, Mallow, Co. Cork

Abstract:

Employment law - Unfair dismissal - Fair procedures - Customer complaints - Company policy on complaints - Warning - Dismissal - Whether unfair - Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 To 2007

CLAIMS OF:	CASE NO.
Aideen Barrett, 132 Beechpark, Ballincollig, Cork - claimant	UD2191/2009 WT920/2009

Against

Nicolette O'Mahony t/a Body Raze, 7 Times Square, Ballincollig, Cork - respondent

under

UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2007

ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT, 1997

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:	Ms. K. T. O'Mahony B.L.
Members:	Mr. D. Hegarty
	Mr. J. Flavin

heard this claim at Cork on 05 October 2010

Facts The claimant worked as a Beauty Therapist. There was a company procedure for logging complaints. The respondent claimed the claimant did not follow it and there were complaints from customers and staff about her. The claimant said she was not aware of the complaints procedure until she received a letter in late June 2009 from the respondent pointing out these procedures. The letter outlined also the complaints concerning the claimant and stated that any reoccurrence would result in instant dismissal. A further complaint about the claimant was made on 4th July the day the claimant was due to start her two week holidays. On 20th July when the claimant was back from holidays the respondent met the claimant and informed her that she was being dismissed due to numerous complaints and failure to comply with company policy.

Held by the Tribunal that there was an unfair dismissal as the respondent had decided to dismiss the claimant on 4th July without first giving the claimant an opportunity to address the complaints. This amounted to a breach of fair procedures and was contrary to principles of natural justice. Claimant awarded €7,700.

Reporter: BD

1 Summary of Evidence

2 The claimant took up full-time employment as a Beauty Therapist in the respondent's salon on completion of her training in 2007. Prior to this she worked part-time during two summers as well as completing her work experience with the respondent. Two other beauty therapists worked in the salon as well. The claimant had six-monthly performance reviews, which...