This case concerned an employee who, without any notice, was informed by the Editor and Director to leave the premises and the reason given was that “his position as general manager was not sustainable”. Furthermore, the employee was informed that he could not appeal the case. 

The Respondent’s case was based on the contention that the claimant was dismissed on financial grounds. The tribunal heard evidence suggesting that if it had not been for the claimant’s dismissal the company would no longer be in existence. The tribunal also heard how various other cuts were made to the company including 10% pay cuts and pension payments being temporarily cancelled.

The tribunal held that both parties recognised that the company was in financial distress and needed to cut costs in order to ensure that the company survived. Whilst this was the case the Tribunal was “not convinced on the evidence that the dismissal of the claimant was attributable wholly or mainly to redundancy”. They based this conclusion on the basis that the relationship between the claimant and respondent had become difficult prior to the resignation of the claimant. 

The Tribunal held that the dismissal of the claimant “was particularly unfair and unreasonable”; although the tribunal did note that it was the result of the pressure the respondent was under rather than with mala fides. The Tribunal noted that the respondent had failed to adhere to any fair procedures, had failed to comply with the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 which meant that the employee was entitled to two weeks’ notice prior to dismissal. The tribunal also noted the lack of discussion with the claimant prior to the decision to make him redundant, and there was a lack of discussion as to the possibility of alternatives to redundancy. 

The tribunal awarded the claimant €30,000 under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977-2007 and a further €10,488 (being pay in lieu of eight weeks’ notice) under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts 1973-2005. 
http://bit.ly/1kC0AN8