The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent in 2010. In November 2016, the Complainant was asked to work in another supermarket as it was being considered for takeover and his assistance was required. The Complainant was always aware that his role as Store Manager in the first supermarket was secure and available to return to once his duties in the second supermarket were complete.

 At the hearing, the Respondent confirmed that it was unable to provide any documentation in relation to the Complainant’s change of employer apart from payslips which show a change in the name and registration number of the Complainant’s employer.  The Respondent was also unable to provide a copy of the Complainant’s new contract nor were they able to provide any evidence that the Complainant had been issued with an Employee Handbook. The Respondent submitted that as the Complainant was in a new role with a new employer, a clause in his contract provided for a maximum 9-month probationary period which stated that his employment could be terminated at any stage. The Respondent made the decision to invoke this clause and terminate his employment.

The Complainant maintained that when he arrived at work one particular day he was ambushed by two company directors and was told that things were not working out and he was being dismissed immediately. He was so shocked he didn't question the decision but enquired by telephone call later that evening and was told that HR would write to him. The Complainant then realised that the Respondent was denying him his entitlement to have his employment regarded as continuous from the 14th September 2010 but was instead treating him as if he only started work on the 12th of April 2017.

The Adjudication Officer noted that the Complainant was not provided with details of any performance issue and he was not afforded any of the procedures set out under the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures. The Respondent could not rely on its mistaken belief that employees who are on probation are not entitled to fair procedures. Therefore, the Respondent was ordered to pay the Complainant compensation amounting to €19,000 for finding that the dismissal of the Complainant was substantively and procedurally unfair.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2020/january/adj-00015765.html