Facts
Gary Maloney (the Complainant) was employed as a senior car sales executive with Bill Griffin Motors (the Respondent) until his termination in October 2022. The Complainant submitted a request to take one week’s holiday leave in October 2022 after his partner booked and paid for a non-refundable holiday in Portugal. There was a conflict in evidence between the parties about what occurred in response. The Respondent claimed that the Complainant’s holiday request was refused on the grounds that a competing family holiday had taken precedence. However, the Complainant alleged he was instructed that it should be all right provided he discuss it with one of the Respondent's Directors ten days beforehand. The Complainant submitted he did not get an opportunity to speak with one of the Respondent's Directors before he went on holidays.
The Complainant bumped into one of the Respondent's Directors while he was on holiday. Upon his return to the office, the Respondent was directed to go home and await further contact. The Respondent alleged they wrote to the Complainant referring to his holiday as "unauthorised holiday, absent without leave" and called for his resignation in writing. The Complainant denied receiving such correspondence and claimed he only discovered he had been terminated when he sought to return to employment on 17 October 2022.
Decision
The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) noted that the Respondent had a Grievance and Disciplinary Policy for addressing poor performance, behaviour and/or conduct issues. The WRC was critical of the fact that this policy was not applied to this dispute. The basic principles of natural justice and fair procedures were also not applied to the dismissal. The Respondent failed to demonstrate any investigation into the disputed holiday leave and did not produce any evidence to demonstrate adherence to its own disciplinary procedure prior to termination of employment.
The WRC determined that the dismissal was unfair on both procedural and substantive grounds. Taking account of the Complainant's actions and personal contribution towards his own dismissal, the WRC directed an award of compensation in the sum of €12,500.
Comment
This is a classic case of the employer having all the right tools at its disposal but failing to apply them. Having the correct policies in place is only as useful as the person who knows how and when to apply them. Had the Respondent applied its existing policies and procedures appropriately, and thoroughly investigated the claimed unauthorised holiday leave, then it is very likely the WRC may have reached a different outcome.
For more information, please contact Patrick Watters or your usual contact on the Beauchamps employment team.
Maloney v Griffin Autos Limited Bill Griffin Motors (ADJ – 00044464)