Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions

THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

 

CASE REF:    6861/09

7158/09

      

CLAIMANT:                Sean Paul Collins

 

RESPONDENT:          Strike Four (Belfast) Limited T/A Bar 7 (in liquidation) 

 

 

 

DECISION 

 

The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that the claimant was unfairly dismissed by the respondent and awards him compensation in the sum of £1750.

 

Sheridan Entertainments Limited is dismissed as a party to these proceedings.

 

Strike Four (Belfast) Limited T/A Bar 7 is now in liquidation and the title of the proceedings is amended accordingly.

 

The claimant’s complaints pursuant to the Sex Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order 1976 as amended and the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 as amended by the Maternity and Parental Leave, etc, Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1999 as amended and his complaint that he was subjected to a detriment by reason of Trade Union membership are dismissed following their withdrawal by the claimant.

 

 

Constitution of Tribunal:

 

Chairman:                  Ms J Knight

 

Members:                  Mr J Devlin

                                  Mr R Hanna

 

 

Appearances:

 

The claimant was represented by Ms Florence Smith of Donnelly and Kinder Solicitors.

 

The respondents did not appear and were not represented.

 

 

EVIDENCE

 

1.       The tribunal considered the oral evidence of the claimant and documents to which it was referred contained in the claimant’s bundle.

 

2.       By an order dated 25 March 2011 the High Court gave leave to the claimant to proceed with his claims to the Industrial Tribunal against Sheridan Entertainments Limited and Strike Four (Belfast) Limited pursuant to Order 15 Rule 7 of the Rules of the Supreme Court and Article 110 of the Insolvency (Northern Ireland) Order 1989.  Ms Smith confirmed that the claimant’s employer prior to his dismissal was Strike Four (Belfast) Limited, a company which has gone into compulsory liquidation.  Ms Smith has been in correspondence with the Official Receiver in connection with the claimant’s application to the High Court for consent and the present tribunal hearings but has not received any response.  The tribunal decided to deal with the hearing in the absence of the respondent in accordance with the Rules of Procedure Industrial Tribunal Regulations 2005. Ms Smith indicated at the outset that the claimant wished to withdraw all his claims currently before the tribunal under case reference numbers 06861/09 and 07158/0,  except for his claim of unfair dismissal.

 

3.       The tribunal made the following relevant findings of fact:-

 

          (1)      The claimant was employed by the respondent from 2 May 2003 until the effective date of his dismissal on 26 May 2009.  He started his employment as a Bartender but was promoted to the position of General Manager in or about 2007.  He had a good working relationship with his senior managers up until approximately October 2008 with the appointment of a Mr King as Operations Manager.

 

          (2)      It was clear that from the documentation that the claimant had a difficult working relationship with Mr King and that the claimant raised concerns with him about staffing and operational matters.  The claimant was issued with a final written warning for the alleged theft of a steak dinner on 26 March 2009.  The claimant notified the respondent of his intention to appeal against this decision but received no response.  He also raised a formal grievance against Mr King on 25 April 2009 with Mr Peter Holmes, the respondent’s Chief Executive.  The grievance hearing was conducted on behalf of the respondent by Mr Stephen Crickard and the claimant’s grievance was not upheld.  His subsequent appeal was unsuccessful.

 

          (3)      After completion of his grievance the claimant was invited to a disciplinary hearing on 26 May 2009 for alleged serious breaches of health and safety on 4 April 2009. The respondent found the offences to be proven and the claimant was dismissed with immediate effect because of the final written warning issued on 25 April 2009.  The claimant appealed against the decision to dismiss him which was not upheld.

 

          (4)      The claimant disputed that this was the genuine reason for his dismissal. He informed the tribunal that he had been on leave following 4 April 2009 and others would therefore have been responsible for cleaning the premises in his absence. He raised this point during the disciplinary process but it appeared that no consideration was given to this by the respondent. The claimant contended that the reason for his dismissal was connected with the fact that he had previously raised a grievance against Mr King.

 

4.       Article 126 of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 (“the 1996 Order”) provides that an employee has the right not to be unfairly dismissed by his employer.  In determining whether the dismissal of an employee is fair or unfair, Article 130(1) of the 1996 Order provides that it is for the employer to show:-

 

                    (a)      the reason for (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal; and

 

                    (b)      that it is either a reason falling within paragraph 2 or some other substantial reason of a kind such as to justify the dismissal of an employee holding the position which the employee held.  Article 130,
sub-paragraph 2 of the 1996 Order specifies the potentially fair reasons which includes the conduct of the employee concerned.

 

5.       In the present case the tribunal considered that the claimant had raised matters which were sufficient to put in issue the genuineness of the reason asserted by the respondent for his dismissal.  The tribunal did not consider that the respondent had discharged its burden of showing the reason for the dismissal.  Therefore, the tribunal must find that the dismissal is unfair.

 

            6.   The claimant did not make any claim for a compensatory award.  Therefore, the tribunal awards to the claimant compensation calculated as follows:-

 

                                Basic Award

                                Average Gross Weekly Wage £423.00

                                Capped at £350.00

                                Age at EDD:  26 years

                                Length of Service: 6 years

                              

2 x 0.5 x £350.00 =    £350.00    4 x 1   x £350.00   =  £1400.00                                      £1750.00

                     

                       [2 x

 

This is a relevant decision for the purposes of the Industrial Tribunals (Interest) Order (Northern Ireland) 1990.

 

 

Chairman:

 

 

Date and place of hearing:         23 June 2011, Belfast

 

 

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: