FTP Recruitment Ltd T/A Clarity Locums v John Madden

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 12 February 2020
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2020] 2 JIEC 1222
• Date: 12 February 2020
• Docket Number: FULL RECOMMENDATION DETERMINATION NO.DIC201 ADJ-00022038 CA-00028788-003
• Court: Labour Court (Ireland)

PARTIES:

FTP Recruitment Limited T/A Clarity Locums

and

John Madden

FULL RECOMMENDATION

ICC/19/1

DETERMINATION NO.DIC201

ADJ-00022038 CA-00028788-003

Labour Court

DIVISION:

Chairman: Ms Jenkinson

Employer Member: Mr Marie

Worker Member: Mr McCarthy

SECTION 15 (1), EMPLOYEES (PROVISION OF INFORMATION AND CONSULTATION) ACT, 2006

SUBJECT:

1 1. An appeal of an Adjudication Officer's Decision No(s) ADJ-00022038 CA-00028788-003.

BACKGROUND:

2 2. The Worker referred his case to the Labour Court on 26 November 2019, in accordance with Section 15(1) of the Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act, 2006. A Labour Court Hearing took place on 7 February 2020

DETERMINATION:

3 The case came before the Court by way of a complaint under Section 15(1) of the Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act 2006 (“the Act”). The Adjudication Officer found that the claim was not well-founded.

4 For ease of reference the parties are given the same designations as they had at first instance. Hence Mr John Madden will be referred to as “the Complainant” and FTP Recruitment t/a Clarity Locums Limited will be referred to as “the Respondent”.

5 The Complainant referred his claim to the Workplace Relations Commission on 31st May 2019. The Adjudication Officer hearing took place on 6th October 2019, and his Decision was issued on 16th October 2019. The Complainant appealed the Decision on 26th November 2019.

6 The Complainant claimed that he was penalised for reporting and raising concerns over alleged breaches of employment rights by the Respondent. He claims that as a result he was blacklisted and has been unable to acquire work through the agency since.

Background

7 The Respondent is an employment agency licenced in accordance with the provision of the Employment Agency Act 1971. The Complainant is a pharmacist registered with Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland. It is not disputed that the Complainant was an employee of the Respondent. He worked as a Locum Pharmacist for the Respondent in various pharmacy clients.

Court Findings

8 The Act contains provisions for the protection of employee representatives from penalisation by an employer for performing their information and consultation duties and functions. In order to be encompassed by the terms of the Act, the Complainant must establish that he was an “employees' representative” as defined by Section 6 of the Act, which required that he be elected or appointed by employees...