Gaffney v P.J. Carroll & Company Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 16 January 2007
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2007] 1 JIEC 1601
• Date: 16 January 2007
• Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)

Employment Appeals Tribunal

EAT: Gaffney (claimant) v P.J. Carroll & Co. Ltd (respondent)

Abstract:

Employment law - Unfair dismissal - Redundancy - Whether the claimant was fairly selected for redundancy - Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2001 - Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2001

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CLAIMS) OF:

Justin Gaffney, Drumconnick, Cavan

CASE NO.

UD290/2005

MN20812005

against

P.J. Carroll & Co. Limited, Burton Hall Park, Sandyrnount, Dublin 18

under

MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2001

UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2001

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:	Mr M. O'Connell B.L.
Members:	Mr P. Pierson
	Mr P. Clarke

heard this claim at Cavan on 18th November 2005

and 6th February 2006

and 8th January 2007

Facts The claimant was initially employed by the respondent as a Trade Marketing Representative (TMR). In October 2003, he was advised that his position within the respondent company was at risk, but he was not made redundant. The role of TMR was to be replaced with the role of Business Development Executive (BDE). In March 2004, the claimant was made a permanent member of staff and was then required to decide whether he wanted to take voluntary redundancy or apply for the new position of BDE. The claimant unsuccessfully applied for the role of BDE. The claimant stated that he felt the assessment process was unfair as it was not carried out by an outside company. Three of the other unsuccessful applicants were re-instated to the respondent company but the claimant was not. The HR Administrator and Manager at the time of the claimant's employment gave evidence. She stated that between 2001 and 2003 there was a reduction in profit and accordingly it was decided to restructure personnel.

Held by the Tribunal in favour of the claimant: That a redundancy situation existed in the respondent company. However, having regard to the fact that the claimant was made a permanent employee five months after being informed that his position was at risk, the redundancy was unfairly applied. Consequently, the claimant was unfairly dismissed and was entitled to compensation in the sum of Eur30,000.

The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:-

Claimant's Case

1 The claimant gave evidence. Having been successful in three interviews, the claimant commenced employment with the respondent on January 2nd 2001 as a Trade Marketing Representative (T.M.R.). At first he was based in the Donegal/Sligo area. After two years a position in the Cavan/Monaghan became available, he was successful in acquiring it. His job spec included sales, meeting with retailers, supplying vending machines and retail outlets with the respondent's products.

2 On October 9th 2003 the staff were made aware that jobs could be at risk and the respondent would be streamlining some positions. Nine voluntary redundancies were required and the role of T.M.R would be replaced with the role of Business Development Executive (B.D.E.). The claimant...