Aine O'Driscoll

 Sheenco Travel Limited

 Employer failed to follow fair procedures when summarily dismissing employee for performance issues.

The Complainant submitted that the Respondent retroactively applied a gross misconduct justification for her dismissal, having failed to follow fair procedures. She was summarily dismissed in July 2024 without notice of the issues being raised, without a formal meeting, and without the opportunity to respond, be represented, or appeal. These omissions were said to breach the Respondent’s own disciplinary procedures set out in its Employee Handbook. The Complainant stated that she was shocked by the dismissal, which occurred via a phone call, and that she was immediately locked out of the company system. She also described ongoing training issues, system faults, and other operational challenges that had affected performance. She secured part-time employment in September 2024 but at a significant reduction in income. She claimed the dismissal was procedurally unfair and lacking in natural justice.

The Respondent stated that disciplinary action began in 2023 following repeated performance issues and customer complaints. Despite providing in-person and online training, and support, the Complainant continued to make errors, including incorrect bookings, miscommunications, and failure to complete pre-arrival checks. She received a verbal warning in August 2023 and a written warning in September 2023, which she was given the opportunity to appeal. Further booking and communication errors occurred in 2024. Mid-July 2024, the Complainant’s employment was terminated following a video call. The Respondent stated this was due to ongoing performance failures amounting to gross misconduct, which posed reputational and financial risks.

The Adjudicator found that while the Complainant’s performance had been substandard, with a verbal warning in August 2023 and a written warning in September 2023, her dismissal lacked due process. She was dismissed during a video call with no notice, no opportunity to respond to allegations, no representation, and no right of appeal. The Respondent cited gross misconduct, but the dismissal process failed to follow the principles set out in S.I. 146/2000, which require clarity on allegations, opportunity to respond, representation, and an internal appeal. As these fair procedures were not observed, the dismissal was deemed unfair. While the Complainant contributed to the situation through repeated errors, the lack of fair procedure rendered the dismissal unjust. The Adjudicator concluded that compensation, not reinstatement, was appropriate and the Complainant was awarded €5,000 compensation under the Unfair Dismissals Acts.

Employers should:

• Follow Fair Procedures: Even where performance issues are evident, employers must strictly follow fair procedures as outlined in the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures (S.I. 146/2000). This includes giving advance notice of disciplinary meetings, clearly stating the allegations, allowing the employee to respond, permitting representation, and offering a right of appeal.  
  
  
• Avoid Abrupt Dismissals: Terminating an employee without due process can render an otherwise justified dismissal procedurally unfair. Even where the employee's performance has been poor, failure to observe process may result in financial awards against the employer and reputational damage.
  
  
• Ensure Training and Documentation: Employers should ensure that all managers involved in disciplinary matters are properly trained. Thorough documentation of performance issues and all steps taken is essential to support the decision to dismiss, should it be challenged. 
  

The full case can be found here:
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2025/march/adj-00053816.html