Background:

The Complainant submitted he was unfairly dismissed by the Respondent when he was suffering from depression.

The Complainant accepted he did receive all the email communications from the Respondent in relation to the disciplinary procedure but submitted he was very depressed at the time when they were sent, and he was disengaged completely to the extent he did not monitor his email.

The Complainant stated he was completely unaware of the disciplinary proceedings and did not participate in any of the meetings or engage in any way with the process. The email notification of the outcome of the disciplinary process stated the Complainant was dismissed from his employment. The Complainant remained on the payroll for several months after the date of dismissal due to a mistake by the Respondent and he continued to receive payments. The Complainant assumed he was receiving sick pay on foot of medical certificates which he had given to his colleague to be delivered to the store. It was only when his remuneration ceased that he became aware of any issue with his employment. The Complainant submitted it was only at that stage he checked his emails and discovered the email communications relating to the disciplinary process.

The Respondent contended the decision to dismiss was fair and proportionate in the circumstances. The Respondent did not accept the Complainant’s contention that he did not read his emails until several months after the dismissal, rather the Complainant chose to ignore them and not to engage at all with the disciplinary process. The Respondent contended the Complainant was guilty of gross misconduct and dismissal in the circumstances was fair and proportionate.

The Adjudication Officer accepted the evidence of the Complainant that he was severely depressed and disengaged from life during the period when the email communications regarding the disciplinary process were sent.

The Adjudication Officer held that the Respondent did not make sufficient effort to alert the Complainant to the investigation and disciplinary correspondence. The Adjudication officer concluded that no reasonable employer in the circumstances would have dismissed the Complainant and accordingly it was found to be an unfair dismissal.

Outcome:

The Respondent was directed to pay compensation to the Complainant in the sum of €16,000 for unfair dismissal.

Practical Guidance for Employers:

When determining whether an employer’s decision to dismiss for gross misconduct was fair, the Adjudication Officer will consider against the facts what a reasonable employer in the same position and circumstances at that time would have done. When assessing an award for compensation, the Workplace Relations Commission will consider whether the employee made sufficient effort to mitigate their loss of earnings by trying to secure alternative employment.

The full case is here:
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2023/april/adj-00037483.html