A service desk engineer dismissed by bookmaker Bar One Racing for alleged poor attendance and timekeeping was subject to “deplorable” treatment by the company, the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has found.
The company conducted a “masterclass in how not to convene a disciplinary meeting” as it dealt with Liam Kyle, who initially worked on a part-time basis before being made permanent in October 2023, said WRC adjudication officer Pat Brady.
Mr Kyle, who said he believed he did good work for the company, was called to an initial meeting last September at which it was put to him he had been absent on 16 occasions.
He accepted there were absences but was not sure how many and had not considered it an issue until the meeting. A document stating the number as 16 was put to him and he was told that if he did not sign it, his employment could be terminated. He said he signed it under duress.
He said there were a couple of other meetings he considered to be informal and though the company said he was given a letter of warning, he said he did not recall seeing it and had certainly not been given a copy.
Mr Kyle did not initially realise he was the subject of disciplinary proceedings but was dismissed at a meeting in January. He said he found alternative work five weeks later.
In his decision on the case, Mr Brady described the conduct of the hearing into the matter as “somewhat extraordinary” due to the company’s attitude.
Represented by two members of its HR department, he said Bar One Racing failed to produce the relevant staff members as witnesses, did not make written submissions and demonstrated complete confusion with regard to the conduct of the meetings Mr Kyle was obliged to attend.
“The respondent did not apparently consider it necessary to submit any relevant documents in evidence from which I draw the obvious conclusions in respect of the burden of proof,” he said.
It was “fatal” to the employer’s case, he said, that Mr Kyle was not given a copy of the written warning “if indeed it ever existed”.
“It seems probable that no such warning was administered on the date claimed and in any event, the complainant should have been given a copy of it formally,” Mr Brady said.
“It is rare these days to encounter such a complete repertoire of gross breaches of fair procedure and of a worker’s rights.”
Based on Mr Kyle’s earning of €540 per week, and the fact there was no ongoing loss due to him having found new work, he ordered that Bar One pay him €2,700 in compensation.
