The Complainant was employed as a Store Manager/Supervisor with the Respondent from 30th April 1997 until his dismissal on the 16th September 2019 for gross misconduct.  The conduct in question related to the behaviour of the Complainant, which was alleged to be confrontational, aggressive and intimidatory towards his line manager.

The Complainant argued that the sanction of dismissal was unreasonable considering his dedicated service over the course of his employment.  In particular the Complainant argued that the outcome of the disciplinary hearing was pre-ordained and the investigation while conducted by an external party was commissioned by the Managing Director, was substandard and the whole process did not follow the principles of natural justice.

The Adjudication Officer found preferred the evidence of the Respondent and the balance of probabilities found that the behaviour of the Complainant amounted to gross misconduct and the decision to the dismiss was within the band of reasonable responses.  In reaching his decision the AO reaffirmed that his role was not to substitute his views for those involved in dealing with the matter but to establish if the procedures adopted by the Respondent were fair and objective.  In doing so the Adjudication Officer stated “having examined the process in question and upon consideration of both parties evidence and submissions, I am satisfied that the Respondent conformed to the generally accepted standard of fairness and objectivity that would normally be used in such cases.”

In relation to the allegation that the investigation was substandard the Adjudication Officer did not agree that it was so or that if failed to follow the principles of natural justice. 
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2020/june/adj-00026053.html