Rachel Swords v Super Valu

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 24 September 1998
• Judgment citation (vLex): [1998] 9 JIEC 2401
• Date: 24 September 1998
• Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)

Employment Appeals Tribunal

Rachel Swords v Super Valu

Abstract:

Dismissal - Retail shop - Failure to carry out instruction - Grievance procedure not followed - Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts 1973 - 1991 - Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 - 1993

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CASE NO.

UD516/98 MN1149/98

CLAIM(S) OF:

Rachel Swords, 4 Abbey Court., Naas, Co. Kildare

against

Super Valu, Fairgreen, Naas, Co Kildare

under

MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 1991

UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACTS, 1977 TO 1993

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman: Ms. R. O'Connell

Members: Mr B. Kealy Dr A. Clune

heard this claim at Naas on 16th September 1998

A vacancy arose in the respondent company and the claimant and a colleague approached the manager with a suggestion that for more money they would take on the extra work. A decision was postponed pending the return from holidays of the owner. In the interim the assistant manager asked the claimant to place an order for another department. The claimant refused and referred to the matter awaiting the owner's return. On being reported, the manager asked her again to do the job and she refused again. Neither party availed of the grievance procedure.

The Tribunal determined that, given the particular context in which the claimant was asked to carry out the additional work, her refusal to do so did not constitute reasonable grounds for summary dismissal. Awarded £1,368 and £716 equivalent to four weeks gross pay under the Minimum Notice legislation.

The determination of the Tribunal was as follows:—

1 The claimant was employed as a Sales Assistant by the respondent from November 1990 to 16th June 1998 when her employment terminated. Dismissal is in dispute between the parties.

Claimants Case:

2 The claimant. told the Tribunal that on 12th June 1998 she and a colleague took the initiative and approached the Store Manager in his office seeking a wage increase for extra work which they would be prepared to do. This would involve ordering and packing shelves in another department. The position had become vacant two weeks previously. The Manager told them that he would have to discuss the matter with the owner on his return from holidays and he would get back to them.

3 On 16th June 1998 the claimant was helping her colleague in her own department and the Assistant Manager approached her to place an order in another department. She...