Latest in Employment Law>Case Law>An Employee v A Technology Company [2017]
An Employee v A Technology Company [2017]
Published on: 21/06/2017
Issues Covered: Dismissal Redundancy
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Legal Island
Legal Island
{}
Background

This decision of an Adjudication Officer concerned the possible relocation of an employee from Dublin to Cork. The complainant worked as a Senior Design Engineer for the respondent company in their Dublin office. The complainant went on maternity leave and during this time she received a relocation offer to move to Cork. She alleged it was during this period that she had been unfairly dismissed.

The complainant requested more details about the relocation and sought an explanation for it. She received a response outlining the reasons but did not receive any information regarding the actual relocation itself. She was told to respond by a certain date with her answer. She was then notified that, as she had failed to respond within the prescribed timescale, her contract of employment was being terminated.

The respondent agreed with the complainant’s evidence and stated that the decision was made to close the Dublin office as there was only one employee left there, the complainant. It was originally thought that she could work from home but upon reflection the company decided that the role would be moved to Cork. The respondent stated that the role was not made redundant and that is why the complainant was not offered a redundancy payment.

The Adjudication Officer found the respondent’s means and methods of communication inadequate and inappropriate. The respondent failed to provide the complainant with the necessary information regarding the relocation and set an unreasonable deadline for her to respond:

“The respondent, by giving her a short deadline was forcing her to make a decision, while on maternity leave and without any information about the offer of re-location.”

The Adjudication Officer concluded the respondent had failed to implement and adhere to a proper policy or procedure and awarded the complainant €6,500 as compensation notwithstanding that the AO found her salary now is equivalent to that when she was working with the respondent.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Cases/2017/May/%20ADJ-00005197.html

Continue reading

We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.

Already a subscriber?

Please log in to view the full article.

What you'll get:

  • Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
  • Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
  • 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
  • Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team

Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial

Disclaimer The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article. This article is correct at 21/06/2017
Q&A
Legal Island’s LMS, licensed to you Imagine your staff having 24/7 access to a centralised training platform, tailored to your organisation’s brand and staff training needs, with unlimited users. Learn more →