| Employee awarded €7,500 for being unfairly selected for redundancy |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by Rita Gillen |
| Monday, 15 November 2010 13:03 |
|
A former employee who was made redundant was awarded €7,500 in compensation by the Employment Appeals Tribunal (E.A.T.) due to being unfairly selected for redundancy. The employee commenced employment as bookkeeper in the respondent's company in January 2008. A year later, the company went into financial difficulty and the financial advisor of the company advised staff that short-term and a 12.5% pay cut were being considered. However, the company decided to implement redundancies instead, fearing that short-term would aversely affect customer service. The financial advisor submitted to the tribunal that at a staff meeting, the complainant had volunteered herself for redundancy, claiming that she had hairdressing skills and that she was concerned for a colleague with a young family. The former employee denied expressing this request at the staff meeting. The company, when they were determining who would be selected for redundancy, examined the employees' attendance and disciplinary records, as well as their strengths and weaknesses. In a meeting with the company directors on January 30th 2009, the complainant was informed that she had been selected redundancy. However, she was never informed of the selection criteria, nor did the directors enquire as to her ability to perform other tasks. While the E.A.T. did acknowledge that a genuine redundancy situation existed, they held that the complainant had been unfairly selected for redundancy. Their decision was based on the fact that the complainant was never afforded the opportunity to make her own submissions on the matter, and that she was never shown the strengths and weaknesses criteria. Since the former employee was selected due to her attendance and disciplinary record, the E.A.T. held that this was in fact a disciplinary matter. They held that the company were in effect disciplining the complainant, and that these factors should not have formed part of their decision making. Thus, the E.A.T. awarded the former employee €7,500 in compensation for unfair redundancy. |
