Haysley v RTS Brochure Distribution Ltd

JurisdictionIreland
CourtEmployment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)
Judgment Date24 Apr 2003
Judgment citation (vLex)[2003] 4 JIEC 2401

Employment Appeals Tribunal

EAT: Haysley v RTS Brochure Distribution Ltd

Abstract:

Employment Law - EAT - Absences from work - Pregnancy - Dismissal - Whether dismissed due to pregnancy - Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 - 2001

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CASE NO.

UD807/2002

CLAIM(S) OF:

Bernadette Haysley, 27 Castleview Close, Swords, Co. Dublin.

against

RTS Brochure Distribution Ltd., Unit 66, Baldoyle Industrial Estate, Grange Close, Baldoyle, Dublin 13

Under

UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2001

I Certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:

Mr. D. Horan

Members:

Mr W. Power

Mr. S. Redmond

heard this claim at Dublin on 6th February 2003

Facts The claimant worked as an office manager and receptionist for the respondent company. The company's clients were travel agents and certain times of the year were very busy. After the claimant discovered she was pregnant she suffered a lot from morning sickness and was off work. The respondent claimed the claimant had a poor attendance record. Circumstances of her dismissal were disputed by the parties.

Held On the balance of probabilities the Tribunal found the claimant's dismissal was on grounds of pregnancy and awarded her EUR 7,500.

1

The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:- The fact of dismissal was in dispute in this case

Claimant's case:
2

The claimant in her evidence told the Tribunal that she commenced her employment with the respondent on 1St September, 2001. She had bought a house in Swords which was where the respondent was located and had previously worked in the city centre but ultimately wanted to move closer to home. She had worked in a full-time permanent position prior to moving to the respondent company. Having been interviewed by the Managing Director, she was told that her duties would be to run the office, with general secretarial and reception work. She said that she did not receive the letter of appointment/contract of employment, dated 22nd August, 2001, which was submitted to the Tribunal at the outset of the hearing. She was therefore not aware of the three month probationary period.

3

The claimant said that there were no problems until she told the respondent that she was pregnant at the end of November, 2001. She suffered from severe morning sickness and was absent from work on a number of occasions and on this point documentary evidence was presented to the Tribunal. She informed the Managing Director about her morning sickness problem and requested permission to finish work at 4.00 p.m. each day. She was given the okay once all the work was complete. The claimant said that she was always up-to-date with her work

4

On 19th December, 2001 the claimant was out sick...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT