The Complainant was employed as a Warehouse Supervisor with the Respondent from April 2004 until his dismissal in March 2019 for misconduct. An incident occurred on the 1st of March when a consignment of brick particles were dispatched from the Respondent’s premises but were not secured in the truck. Consequently, the brick particles were damaged upon arrival at the Respondent’s client’s premises. There was a subsequent financial loss to the company. The Respondent claimed that the client had also threatened to pull their lucrative account.

The Complainant claimed that none of his training procedures suggested that it was his responsibility to secure the load in the truck. Neither did his job description make him responsible for securing and wrapping the load onto the truck. The Complainant’s representative submitted that the burden is on the employer to prove that the dismissal was not unfair. The Respondent failed to show which procedure the Complainant was in breach of or if written procedures existed about his responsibilities. The only document referred to in the hearing was the job description which stated that it was the Complainant’s duty to supervise loading. His job description did not state that he is required to secure the load. The Complainant was not advised of his right to representation in advance of the hearing.

The Respondent denied the Complainant’s claims and submitted that the Complainant was lawfully dismissed, subsequent to an incident which caused several thousand euros of property damage, in circumstances whereby the claimant had prior disciplinary issues and was on a final written warning. The Respondent was unable to furnish any procedure which the Complainant had breached.

The Adjudication Officer found that the decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses of a reasonable employer. The Respondent’s own notes indicated that though requested, the Respondent failed, despite assurances to the contrary, to provide the Complainant with a copy of the procedure which he was alleged to have breached. The Complainant was therefore at a disadvantage defending himself at appeal stage against an allegation that he had breached a procedure when the procedure or the checklist specifying what he was required to do was withheld from him. Accordingly, the Adjudication Officer found that there were procedural defects and therefore on procedural grounds, the Complainant had been unfairly dismissed. As the Complainant failed to mitigate his loss and contributed to his own dismissal, the Adjudication Officer awarded him the sum of €2,924 in compensation.

Employers are once again reminded of the importance of following fair procedures in dismissal situations including ensuring that employees have access to all relevant documentation to enable them to mount a defence.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2020/june/adj-00024278.html