Background:

The Complainant was employed as a waitress at the Respondent coffee shop from 6 August 2020 on a part-time basis alongside the Complainant’s university studies, receiving €12 an hour. In March 2023 the Complainant asked for time off of the roster to prepare for her final exams, which was granted by the Respondent, and the Complainant returned to the roster on 18 May 2023. The Complainant then asked for two days off, from 23-34 July 2023, to prepare for an interview for a master’s degree program. In reply the Respondent sent the Complainant a text advising her that “Your availability is so limited that I don’t think I have a position for you anymore.” The Respondent also alleged the Complainant had not performed to a high enough standard. The Complainant responded clarifying that she was being dismissed, and the Respondent confirmed this was the case. The Complainant gave evidence that she had attempted to obtain a new job, but that she was not called for interview, and alleged that this was due to the fact that the “word was out” that she had been fired.

The Respondent responded by saying that the Complainant was not within the jurisdiction of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 because she had resigned her employment in March 2023 before taking on a new contract in May 2023. This meant that the Complainant would be within her probationary period, during which the Respondent could dismiss the Complainant for any reason or no reason at all, and that the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 did not apply. The Respondent also alleged that the Complainant had exhibited poor performance at work, including that the Complainant had come to work smelling of alcohol on one occasion.

Outcome:

The Adjudication Officer preferred the evidence of the Complainant in respect of the continuity of her employment from March to May 2023, and therefore found that the Complainant was entitled to the protection of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977. Having regard to the financial loss incurred by the Complainant, but also the failure to mitigate by failing to find a job in a busy country town in the summer months, the Adjudication Officer directed the Respondent to pay the complainant €1,170, a figure representing six weeks’ wages for the Complainant.

Practical Guidance for Employers:

Employment rights apply even in “casual” jobs where the job done is not the primary activity of the worker, and it is not acceptable (and in most cases is unlawful) to dismiss someone unilaterally by text message.

The full case is here:
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2024/march/adj-00047228.html