An Adjunct Lecturer v A Third Level Education facility [2019] ADJ-00018001

Keywords: Sham Redundancy, Consultation; Unfair Dismissal, Terms and Conditions of Employment

This case illustrates a lack of transparency and inadequacy in the dismissal of an employee. The Complainant was employed on an annual and initially ad hoc basis to teach language and culture for the Respondent. The Complainant was engaged to perform circa 9 hours of lectures per week. After successfully arguing his entitlement to be provided with a contract of indefinite duration, the Complainant was not supplied with a physical contract of employment but rather was referred to an e-mail from the Respondent which confirmed his working hours and that “the above non-core language classes will continue if sufficient students continue to opt for them”.

In March of 2018, the Respondent advertised for the position of assistant professor in the same department as the Complainant. The Complainant competed for the position, although he accepted that he did not possess the relevant requirements for it. Without any notice, the Complainant was informed that his services no longer required with the Respondent in September 2018. The Respondent explained that this was owing to the fact that the new assistant professor was taking some of his classes and there was no longer any demand for the subject. The Complainant argued that this was not a cogent reason for his dismissal. However, the Respondent relied on the e-mail sent to the Complainant and again re-iterated how they could not retain the Complainant to give classes that no-one would attend.

The court found that unfair dismissal had taken place. The Adjudication Officer placed particular emphasis on the lack of notice period to dismiss the Complainant. Additionally, the Complainant was at no time given any evidence or feedback on what interest there might have been in relation to his courses, nor was there any discussion of continuing with cut back hours or on an ad hoc basis. The Court awarded the Complainant €4,000 for his loss of earnings. In addition, the court held that the Complainant was entitled to be paid for the minimum notice period and also ordered the Complainant be paid compensation of €500.00 for the Respondent’s failure to provide a statement in writing on his terms of employment.

https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Cases/2019/April/%20ADJ-00018001.html