Latest in Employment Law>Case Law>Tesco Ireland Limited v A Worker [2018]
Tesco Ireland Limited v A Worker [2018]
Published on: 19/12/2018
Issues Covered: Dismissal Discipline
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Legal Island
Legal Island
{}
Background

This case concerns an appeal of the Adjudication Officer's recommendation. The complainant claimed there had been a breach of fair procedure in the company’s application of disciplinary/dismissal procedures.

The complainant commenced employment with the Respondent company in 2012. In 2014 he submitted a grievance to management regarding issues he was having with his line manager. He was unhappy with the outcome of the investigation but did not pursue it further at that time. Further issues followed in relation to his beard, which involved the manager sending him home as it was not considered to be neat and tidy and in line with company policy.

The complaint was not paid on these occasions. His mother then wrote to the Respondent expressing her concerns regarding how her son was being treated and subsequent to this a number of meetings were held. A report was then issued by the respondent company on the 1st of July 2016 which was appealed by the complainant. He was unhappy with the outcome of the appeal and requested that his case be referred to the WRC.

It was held that the first grievance had been investigated by the Respondent, and the manager, who had since terminated employment, was spoken to about his management style. There then followed a number of grievances including those relating to his beard and the company’s holiday policy. Each grievance was investigated in line with the grievance procedure.

The complainant appealed the outcome and his letter of appeal stated that it was his view that he was suspended. The appeal outcome held that at no stage was he suspended, repeated that beard nets should be available, that there were no witnesses to any improper treatment by management and that his holidays were assigned in accordance with the policy.

The Respondent had been actively seeking to engage with the worker to facilitate a normal return to work and had made repeated attempts to meet with him. The Court upheld the  recommendation of the AO and recommended the complainant actively engage with the employer in relation to his return to work. The Court also held that the company should pay the complainant the sum of €2,500 compensation in recognition of the fact that the “beard” issue could have been handled in a timelier fashion.
 https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Cases/2018/November/LCR21838.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 19/12/2018
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 →