A MAN WHO was unfairly dismissed from his employment at a Co Galway abbey has been awarded €76,000 in compensation by the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT).
The judgement, which can be read here, is one of the largest made by the EAT in recent times.
Fergus Lally, a brother of Irish hotelier John Lally, had been employed at Kylemore Abbey in Connemara as an assistant retail manager in the abbey’s craft shop since June 2010.
The lease covering the property returned to the company Kylemore Abbey and Gardens Ltd on 14 December 2014. For the previous year the lease had been held by a company owned by Fergus Lally’s brother.
Lally claimed that in November 2014 he had specifically asked the CEO of Kylemore Abbey whether or not his job was safe given his brother would no longer be involved.
He was told that all staff would transfer to the new employer under the lease agreement.
The CEO of the company said that in January 2015 it was decided, ultimately by him, that Lally’s position was “surplus to requirements” and that he would be made redundant.
Under cross-examination he admitted that the Last-In-First-Out process was not used in this circumstance, and that was “just the position”.
On 16 January 2015 the CEO asked the claimant to meet him in an area near the abbey’s restaurant, where he informed Lally the company “no longer needed him”.
Lally told the tribunal that he was “in shock”, particularly as he had been about to apply for a mortgage. His salary at the time was €38,000.
He said that the CEO had clearly assured him that his job was safe in a meeting in the cafeteria in October 2014. Having lost his job, he had failed to secure new employment, and had set up a number of businesses in the interim but without success.
Having taken statutory redundancy of €6,240, Lally applied to the EAT alleging his unfair dismissal. The claim was heard in May 2016.
Determination
The tribunal stated that it is up to the employer to justify the selection of an employee for redundancy, and that the reasonableness of an employer’s conduct is an “essential factor” in all unfair dismissal cases.
The tribunal said there had been no consultation with Lally prior to the decision to make him redundant, and that there was no advance warning of the meeting in which he was told he would be made redundant.
Likewise, he was given no right of representation at the meeting, no right of appeal of the decision, was offered no alternative employment.
Similarly, there was no redundancy policy in place, and no consideration was given to the Last-In-First-Out policy.
The tribunal therefore found Lally’s dismissal to be unfair and awarded him €76,000 in compensation, which is surplus to the statutory redundancy figure already received.
Comments are disabled for legal reasons
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say