Kinsella v Ratoath Childcare Centre Ltd

JurisdictionIreland
CourtEmployment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)
Judgment Date11 Feb 2004
Judgment citation (vLex)[2004] 2 JIEC 1101

Employment Appeals Tribunal

EAT: Kinsella v Ratoath Childcare Centre Limited

Abstract:

EAT - Employment - Unfair dismissal - Constructive dismissal - Redundancy - Onus of proof - Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2001 - Whether the claimant had been unfairly constructively dismissed.

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CASE NO.

UD645/2003

CLAIM(S) OF:

Lorraine Kinsella, 6 De Lacey Cresent, Trim, Co. Meat

against

Ratoath Childcare Centre Limited, Jamestown, Ratoath, Co. Meat

under

UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2001

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:

Mr. D. Horan

Members:

Mr. G. Mc Auliffe

Ms. K. Warnock

heard this claim at Navan on 30th October 2003 and 11th December 2003

Facts The claimant commenced employment as a receptionist with the respondent company on 10 September, 2001. On 14 January, 2002 the claimant was promoted by the then managing director of the respondent company to the position of human resources manager. However, two months later, the claimant was required to take sick leave from work due to a threatened miscarriage and upon her return to work she was demoted back to her original job title and salary level. Subsequently, the claimant was informed by the new managing director that she would return to work from her maternity leave as human resources manager at the agreed salary. However, upon the claimants return to work from maternity leave on 1 April 2003 she was informed by the managing director that the human resources position had been made redundant. Alternative job offers were made to the claimant, however she was not satisfied with those offers and accordingly she resigned and subsequently claimed that she had been unfairly dismissed. The new managing director gave evidence that as a result of his more hands-on approach he concluded from his experience that he did not need a human resources manager. A representative from the respondent company's accounts and business advisor gave evidence that he had informed the new managing director that the trading position of the respondent company had been a disaster during the relevant period and a copy of the company's audited and certified accounts for the fourteen months up to 30 June, 2002 was submitted in evidence.

Held by the Tribunal in dismissing the claimant's claim for constructive dismissal:

1. That the onus of proof in the matter rested with the claimant, who's claim was grounded on constructive dismissal.

2. That the claimant had failed to discharge that onus of proof.

3. That there was compelling evidence to support the respondent's contention that serious financial losses warranted the action taken in making the position of human resources manager redundant. Furthermore, the offers of alternative employment to the claimant were not unreasonable.

The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:-
Claimant's Case:
1

The claimant was the only witness called to give evidence in support of her case. She told the Tribunal that she had commenced...

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