McMullan v Jeffery Adams Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 19 March 2004
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2004] 3 JIEC 1901
• Date: 19 March 2004
• Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)

Employment Appeals Tribunal

EAT: McMullan v Jeffery Adams Limited

Representation:

Claimant(s):

The claimant in person

Respondent(s):

Mr. Laurence Coleman, Director of the respondent company

Abstract:

EAT - Employment - Whether the claimant's dismissal was fair in all the circumstances - Unfair Dismissal Acts, 1977 to 2001 - Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2001 - Organisation of Working Time Act 1997

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CASE NO.

UD814/2003 MN1979/2003

WT207/2003

CLAIM(S) OF:

Jason McMullan, 9 Northbrook Avenue Upper, North

Strand, Dublin 3

against

Jeffery Adams Limited, 7 Towpyard Lane Malahide CO. Dublin

under

MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2001

ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT, 1997

UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 2001

I certify tat the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:

Mr. D. Mac Carthy S C

Members:

Mr J. Goulding

Mr S. Nolan

heard this claim at Dublin on 23rd February 2004

Facts The claimant was employed by the respondent as a store manager in a menswear store on 21 November, 2001 and was then promoted to general manager. The claimant was responsible for rostering staff. The claimant stated in evidence that he was absent from work three or four times over a period of eighteen months. However, the director of the respondent company gave evidence that the claimant was continually absent from work and that those absences caused problems for the director. The director submitted that he reprimanded the claimant and that he furnished the claimant with two written warnings. The claimant submitted that he never received a written warning. Subsequently, on 16 June, 2003 the director contacted the claimant as he had failed to report for work. The claimant was dismissed on a later date.

Held by the Tribunal:

1. That the claimant's dismissal was unfair in that the employer did not adhere to fair procedures. However, there was a substantial contribution on the part of the claimant to the dismissal.

2. That in the circumstances the claimant was entitled to an award of compensation to the value of €1250.00 under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2001 and €11,000 under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1973 to 2001. The claimant was responsible for the rostering of staff and the onus was on him to organise his own time off. Accordingly, his claim under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 failed.

The...