Are employees too well protected in Ireland?

Motorist

A security guard was fired from Tesco for taking products without paying for them. He has been awarded €32,000 in compensation by the Employment Appeals Tribunal.

Seems he was let go for what is considered a very serious offence in many companies.

This case aside and in general, bizarre judgements from Employment Tribunals have resulted in many lazy, incompetent and useless employees keeping their jobs in this country. If they are dismissed, they automatically take a case to the Employment Tribunal looking for compensation.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/man-with-hiv-gets-32000-from-tesco-for-unfair-dismissal-2996637.html

starbelgrade

But he has AIDS.

Eric Cartman

definitley. Its one of the reasons keeping the job market down. That and the minimum wage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFbYM2EDz40

explaination of why minimum wage can be a bad thing

Coriolanus

Yes, I think in some areas they are like the above.

TiGeR KiNgS

starbelgrade wrote: »

But he has AIDS.

HIV from the article

El Siglo

Some reason I'm reminded of this...

starbelgrade

TiGeR KiNgS wrote: »

HIV from the article

Probably. I didn't read past the first line.

Nodin

Motorist wrote: »

A security guard was fired from Tesco for taking products without paying for them. ...........

Yep, he was clearly embarked on a major criminal enterprise.

Indo wrote:

......his consuming a bottle of Ribena and a packet of Snax during his night shift, and failing to pay for them.

Bannasidhe

starbelgrade wrote: »

But he has AIDS.

No he hasn't. He is HIV positive. That means he has the virus - not that he has developed AIDS.

Motorist

starbelgrade wrote: »

But he has AIDS.

I didn't know it caused memory problems.

"He said he had left his wallet in the office and meant to return later to pay, but got distracted by work and simply forgot" :rolleyes:

Lumbo

It also pointed out he was not informed that an initial meeting with the store manager was in fact an inquiry.

Maybe if the HR staff in Tesco's did their job properly the EAT wouldn't have to deal with these type of situations.

starbelgrade

Motorist wrote: »

I didn't know it caused memory problems.

"He said he had left his wallet in the office and meant to return later to pay, but got distracted by work and simply forgot" :rolleyes:

That's AIDS for you.

Motorist

Nodin wrote: »

Yep, he was clearly embarked on a major criminal enterprise.

Taking products without paying for them is considered a very serious offence by many companies. Unless a zero tolerance policy is in place, employees (especially in big companies) run riot taking stuff.

It's also why you generally find a search policy with many bigger companies also. Similarly being caught with shop products often amounts to gross misconduct and results in immediate dismissal.

Motorist

Here's another one of three guys who were sleeping on the job and defrauding the company. Each were awarded around 20,000 each.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/deep-pile-of-cash-for-carpet-workers-who-slept-on-job-1593844.html

Nodin

Motorist wrote: »

Taking products without paying for them is considered a very serious offence by many companies. Unless a zero tolerance policy is in place, employees (especially in big companies) run riot taking stuff.

It's also why you generally find a search policy with many bigger companies also. Similarly being caught with shop products often amounts to gross misconduct and results in immediate dismissal.

...yep, and logically such an attitude leads to mistakes, injustices and the opportunity for vindictive behaviour, as seems to have been the case here. Thankfully we have a system to deal with that kind of thing.

Nodin

Motorist wrote: »

Here's another one of three guys who were sleeping on the job and defrauding the company. Each were awarded around 20,000 each.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/deep-pile-of-cash-for-carpet-workers-who-slept-on-job-1593844.html

Did you bother to read the article?

quietriot

Looks like the Tesco Security Guard title attracts the classiest of ladies

0066ad

Lumbo wrote: »

Maybe if the HR staff in Tesco's did their job properly the EAT wouldn't have to deal with these type of situations.

Hey lumbo, my girl was in one of these situations with the hr off xtra-vision. She was working a busy saturday on her own and someone found 20 euro across the street and handed into the shop, as it was busy she put it in her purse for safe keeping, as there was alot in the queue. That she had to serve.

Next day she had to work was tuesday, but in that time she had a phone call from her boss to tell her hr wanted to see you also on tuesday, she asked what do they want to see me for her boss said i can't tell you it's xtra-vision rules.


So she goes to work on tuesday, about lunch time she had to go to a hotel to see hr of xtra-vison, with her manager only then she finds out it was about the 20 euro they asked where it was she said it's here i have it, they took it off her and frog marched her back to the store to pick up her stuff and sent her home on paid leave

On the following friday they fired her on trust issue's which fcuks up her cv she never never missed a day she was to work, never took a sick day but they treated her like that.

Whats worse is the assistant manager that shopped her to hr was using the shop as a front for his own profit, anybody coming in looking for a new ps3, xbox, wii and nds etc, he would offer to fix their broken consoles at his price and use the shop as depot for pick up and collection, the fcuker even offered to fix my ps3 saying the blue ray eye needs replacing and going to charge me 60 euro. I took a quick look on youtube to clean the lense took me 10 mins to fix and 2 euro for cleaner :mad:


Sorry for the rant and grammar, it was a year ago but still fuming

Cian92

Motorist wrote: »

A security guard was fired from Tesco for taking products without paying for them.

The man forgot to pay for a bottle of ribena and a snack, I doubt that is too serious. He was also being treated differnetly because he had HIV.

The reward seems fair to me.

Motorist

0066ad wrote: »

Hey lumbo, my girl was in one of these situations with the hr off xtra-vision. She was working a busy saturday on her own and someone found 20 euro across the street and handed into the shop, as it was busy she put it in her purse for safe keeping, as there was alot in the queue. That she had to serve.

It was a very bad move putting the money in her own purse. Im not saying she deserved any of what happened to her.

El Weirdo

"It was just resting in my account purse."

patwicklow

Good job he did not work for wall mart

Overature

I think they are way too protected, the unions have way to much control over the employers. As soon as you hear about jobs being cut there is always some over paid muppet from the unions saying how they are having talks and the likes. If I had my own large buissness I would want to be able to pick and choose who I paid to do the work, wouldn't be having any unions telling me how to run my company

0066ad

I agree with you guys, hindsight everybody is a genius, but was it even their money to begin with and to have that on her cv

That manager of said shop is engaged to her brother to make matters worse

Overheal

Nodin wrote: »

Did you bother to read the article?

I did, they admitted defrauding the company on a systematic basis. The ruling baffles me. Is there some sort of ritual employers have to perform in order to fire someone?

Outkast_IRE

Overheal wrote: »

I did, they admitted defrauding the company on a systematic basis. The ruling baffles me. Is there some sort of ritual employers have to perform in order to fire someone?

yes verbal and written notices of warning etc first before you can fire them

Overheal

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

yes verbal and written notices of warning etc first before you can fire them

So let me get this straight: if your employee stole say, a $2700 flatscreen television (70" LED Sharp Aquos, for giggles) and sold it on the street, You couldn't fire him for it, you would have to give him a written warning? And then what, "Don't let it happen again." ?????

Motorist

Slightly different but this one from the Equality Tribunal where a traveller woman claimed she was told to leave a Mothercare store by a male staff member. The company proved they had no male staff members at any stage in that branch and the incident never happened. The woman was still awarded €1500. What kind of numpties are sitting the boards of these quangos?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0816/breaking5.html

Motorist

Overheal wrote: »

So let me get this straight: if your employee stole say, a $2700 flatscreen television (70" LED Sharp Aquos, for giggles) and sold it on the street, You couldn't fire him for it, you would have to give him a written warning? And then what, "Don't let it happen again." ?????

It seems there are more minor offences which can lead to performance management, warnings, etc. A major offence should allow an immediate dismissal but this does not seem to be the case in Ireland. In the above case, the employee would probably sue for hurting his back while stealing the TV also and separately claim he was discriminated against at an Equality Tribunal because he had red hair.

AlmightyCushion

Overheal wrote: »

I did, they admitted defrauding the company on a systematic basis. The ruling baffles me. Is there some sort of ritual employers have to perform in order to fire someone?

"It was also noted by the tribunal that this was a custom and practice that was both known and accepted by the management" of the company over a long period of time.

It added that the company "did not rebut this in its evidence".

Management knew what was going on the whole time and never did anything about it. While the guys shouldn't have been sleeping on the job, management should have either cracked down on it straight away or informed everyone that it was no longer acceptable before they fired someone for it.

Overheal

Motorist wrote: »

In the above case, the employee would probably sue for hurting his back while stealing the TV also.

Nice!

AlmightyCushion

Overheal wrote: »

So let me get this straight: if your employee stole say, a $2700 flatscreen television (70" LED Sharp Aquos, for giggles) and sold it on the street, You couldn't fire him for it, you would have to give him a written warning? And then what, "Don't let it happen again." ?????

In that case, no. That would easily be considered gross misconduct and the employee wouldn't have a leg to stand on. I've worked in places where something like that has happened and that's always been the case. What I don't understand is how they managed to get another job afterwards. The mind boggles.

Motorist

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

In that case, no. That would easily be considered gross misconduct and the employee wouldn't have a leg to stand on. I've worked in places where something like that has happened and that's always been the case. What I don't understand is how they managed to get another job afterwards. The mind boggles.

I genuinely imagine there are lots of technicalities where the above employee could still get a 20,000 award such as wrong terminology being used during the meeting informing them they were fired, some of their "rights" being trampled on or if they offered the explanation that they simply forgot to pay.

Seems to be a minefield for employers. Getting stuck with some useless, incompetent employee as is the case in every small workplace in Ireland would certainly put me off ever owning my own business.

Doc Ruby

Overheal wrote: »

So let me get this straight: if your employee stole say, a $2700 flatscreen television (70" LED Sharp Aquos, for giggles) and sold it on the street, You couldn't fire him for it, you would have to give him a written warning? And then what, "Don't let it happen again." ?????

I'd imagine the guards would be called in that case, there's a fair few criminal prosecutions for employees stealing.

Motorist

Doc Ruby wrote: »

I'd imagine the guards would be called in that case, there's a fair few criminal prosecutions for employees stealing.

That would be criminal charges but you still have to deal with dismissing the employee.

Pete M.

Motorist wrote: »

Are employees too well protected in Ireland?

No.But bosses are :pac:

Eoin

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

yes verbal and written notices of warning etc first before you can fire them

Nope, that's just recommended. Disciplinary procedures must follow certain rules, but the exact steps are not set out in stone. They're generally similar across most companies though so everything's documented should it go to court.

As Lumbo said, HR screwed up on this one:

It also pointed out he was not informed that an initial meeting with the store manager was in fact an inquiry.

As it was part of a disciplinary process, he should have had the right to a witness, right to appeal and so on. That alone most likely decided the outcome.

On topic - Irish employees are a bit better protected than, say, the US or Canada. Over there, it's very easy to be gotten rid of - one screw up and you can find yourself packing a box with your possessions and out the door. In Ireland, it's particularly hard to get rid of someone who is weak at their job but not misbehaving (once they're not on probation).

Logical Fallacy

Motorist wrote: »

A security guard was fired from Tesco for taking products without paying for them. He has been awarded €32,000 in compensation by the Employment Appeals Tribunal.

Seems he was let go for what is considered a very serious offence in many companies.

This case aside and in general, bizarre judgements from Employment Tribunals have resulted in many lazy, incompetent and useless employees keeping their jobs in this country. If they are dismissed, they automatically take a case to the Employment Tribunal looking for compensation.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/man-with-hiv-gets-32000-from-tesco-for-unfair-dismissal-2996637.html

It really depends on what the standard procedure within the company is for dealing what is a very petty theft. If they ****ed up the HR process then that is their mistake and they left themselves open to the case.

However, and this is just my opinion, as a person who was formerly employed in retail security job i have been cut in the course of my duties...so i personally do not think the job is suitable for someone with a disease that can be transmitted via blood.

Nodin

Overheal wrote: »

I did, they admitted defrauding the company on a systematic basis. The ruling baffles me. Is there some sort of ritual employers have to perform in order to fire someone?

Yes. Due process. You seem to have missed

In a determination yesterday, the tribunal noted that the three men "accepted in their evidence that they had defrauded" the company on an "ongoing basis".
"It was also noted by the tribunal that this was a custom and practice that was both known and accepted by the management" of the company over a long period of time.

If such a thing was to be deemed no longer acceptable, then the fair course is to announce that they're no longer acceptable.

xsiborg

if a customer in tesco had walked out without paying for a packet of crisps and a ribena, been caught by the security guard, and told him they'd be back later to pay, would this guy have also found it acceptable?

i very much doubt it, which is the reason tesco were within their rights to fire someone who was in a position of trust, to stop shoplifters and thieves, yet here he was doing the same thing he was hired to stop?

on the basis of this ruling then the girl who was working in tesco and put a lotto ticket aside that she hadnt paid for, that came up as the winning numbers the next day and she tried to claim it, she should've won her case too! or, perhaps not, and rightly so!

i remember an incident when i worked in tesco in portlaoise many years ago where an employee stayed in the shop after closing, and in his attempt to steal a pack of toilet rolls, slipped and fell from the shelf injuring his ankle got fired from tesco after they saw the video cctv, he tried to claim compensation from tesco, and was rightly laughed out of court!

mikemac1

Overature wrote: »

I think they are way too protected, the unions have way to much control over the employers. As soon as you hear about jobs being cut there is always some over paid muppet from the unions saying how they are having talks and the likes.

Unions in Ireland are weak, when's the last time you saw a full strike?
Unions need to be stronger, not weaker.
Leadership out of touch and wasting members money on expensive hotel banquets, strike pay funds dangerously low and too much fighting with others can crying foul about "poaching"
But all that can be improved on

The largest march in the last decade was Irish Ferries, different estimates around but a common one was 100,000 for the Dublin march
And it was a failure, SIPTU the largest union in Ireland got out maneuvered and agreed to two tiers of conditions, one for current workers and slave wages for the new staff

You saw GAMA
We have a recent thread on abuses in the hotel industry, it's a lot worse then what goes on in retail.
Minimum rest periods between shifts? Lol, you finish at four am and you're back for breakfast shift or don't bother coming back at all.

The muppets you see on TV are trying to get the best deal for their members. Profitable companies are leaving Ireland, get the government to pay over half the statutory redundancy up to last year and of course, never forgetting to waste a good recession.
Talk Talk in Waterford

If I had my own large buissness I would want to be able to pick and choose who I paid to do the work, wouldn't be having any unions telling me how to run my company

Nobody is saying you can't do that, unions don't hold the job interviews and make the decisions.
And if you want to let someone go you do this easily within twelve months of the start date. But procedures are there to be followed and if HR and management can't do it then they learn an expensive lesson


The IBEC press releases must be getting through to a lot of boards posters.
They're as much a lobby group with an agenda as any union

mikemac1

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

yes verbal and written notices of warning etc first before you can fire them

There is not one disciplinary process that every company must follow


You don't have to follow verbal, written, final written and then firing.
You can skip any stage or multiple stages depending on what happened
Gross misconduct can get you suspended and fired straight away

Billy86

Lumbo wrote: »

It also pointed out he was not informed that an initial meeting with the store manager was in fact an inquiry.

Maybe if the HR staff in Tesco's did their job properly the EAT wouldn't have to deal with these type of situations.

That type of thing was common practice amongst management when I worked in one of their stores as a teenager. They would pull you up to the office and issue you a warning over being 1 minute late, for failing to empty the bailer after use (if it was full at the time, or not), for failing to stack an aisle manager A had told you to (because you are stacking a different aisle manager B had told you to first, and neither would take 'no/after this aisle' for an answer), etc, etc. All of these and others happened to friends of mine or myself (I was one minute late, and it was my first time being late at this).

Thankfully, it was also common practice for us to go through the whole process up until the point of having to sign in agreement, getting our hands physically on the warning... then asking for our union rep (located in the same site) and watching our department manager's face turn pale ! That meeting would end there-and-then, unless we insisted on it - and got to see our manager recieve an almighty b*****king over it by said rep!

Warnings for legit reasons, they would call people up to the office on with the union rep already there. If there was no union rep present, that was how you knew they were trying to pull a fast one on you.

---

Added to that, after the economy went splat I had to take a job in a well-known petrol station chain who do not have a union. The floor/till staff were paid €8.65/hr, and the deli staff €9.85. After a few months, they started to try to get the (already overworked) floor staff to work on the deli from 3pm-9pm without getting the additional €1.30/hr. They claimed this was due to being stuck for money in the economic climate (funny enough, the idea came through about a week after they splashed six-figures on Croker corporate tickets for rugby/football/GAA - I knew this because a friend worked in head office).

So anyway, the site shut at 11pm and you were paid until 11pm, but would typically be stuck in doing cleaning and stuff until 11.20 or 11.30 (unpaid, and most likely uninsured) or your hours would be cut down to one or no shifts for a while. So this would have likely meant not getting out until near midnight. Added to that, we were already cleaning the deli at night uninsured as our contracts explicitly stated we were not allowed behind the counter - but refusal to do so would again mean no shifts for a while. One of the girls working there slipped and broke her leg in there after I had left, and they refused to pay compensation or even leave for this very reason (and also because there were no cameras behind the deli counter).

Everybody was annoyed by this, but most were Polish and Estonian immigrants and so losing their job in that climate was simply not an option - so I was the only one willing to follow through on the matter in refusing to do so unless we were to be paid the same rate as the deli staff were on. I was then told by the area manager, sneeringly and with a mocking chuckle, to do it or get fired. A few days later I got free legal aid to assist over this and regurgitated what they told me a few days later to him. We never heard another word on the matter, and the whole idea was scrapped altogether.

Moral of the story: if companies didn't try to exploit their workers and pull this type of stuff all the time, the need for such protections would not be there and most of these unions/proceedures would have never existed in the first place. They brought it on themselves.

Nothingbetter2d

wouldn't a security guard with HIV be a potential risk to others in the event of a fight?

Supposing he has to apprehend a shoplifter and a fight breaks out where the security guard and shoplifter end up bleeding... the risk of the shoplifter getting contaminated with the security guy's HIV is there.

If the shoplifter got infected as a result of an altercation with the HIV infected security guard tesco's would be liable for millions in damages.

johnr1

Motorist wrote: »

I genuinely imagine there are lots of technicalities where the above employee could still get a 20,000 award such as wrong terminology being used during the meeting informing them they were fired, some of their "rights" being trampled on or if they offered the explanation that they simply forgot to pay.

Seems to be a minefield for employers. Getting stuck with some useless, incompetent employee as is the case in every small workplace in Ireland would certainly put me off ever owning my own business.

Well at least you know before you start.

I employed people for 15 years. Never again.

30% trying, and good at their job. 30% trying but hopelessly inadequate, 30% don't give a st1t, and 10% thieves, dishonest, etc.

I did a business college dip by night to try to help the business succeed, at a cost of 18 grand, where all the class were small to medium sized business managers. Anyone who had been to the labour court said the same thing : Prepare to bend over. The employer almost never wins. The only reason to hire legal advice is to limit the amount of the payout.

Great country for small business my hole.

.

Outkast_IRE

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

wouldn't a security guard with HIV be a potential risk to others in the event of a fight?

Supposing he has to apprehend a shoplifter and a fight breaks out where the security guard and shoplifter end up bleeding... the risk of the shoplifter getting contaminated with the security guy's HIV is there.

If the shoplifter got infected as a result of an altercation with the HIV infected security guard tesco's would be liable for millions in damages.

The security guard would be told to avoid a fight and ring gurards immediately if there was any aggression , the store would have to protect itself by issuing him with those instructions

token101

Nodin wrote: »

Did you bother to read the article?

I read it twice just to make sure I had it right and hadn't missed some key point.

"In a determination yesterday, the tribunal noted that the three men "accepted in their evidence that they had defrauded" the company on an "ongoing basis"."

Yet they are still entitled to compensation? What a load of s**t. They should have been sued by the company for fraud if anything! So it's ok to come into work, do nothing, sleep on the job just because no one tells you that sleeping in work isn't ok? Absolute nonsense.

Eoin

mikemac1 wrote: »

Unions in Ireland are weak, when's the last time you saw a full strike?
Unions need to be stronger, not weaker.
Leadership out of touch and wasting members money on expensive hotel banquets, strike pay funds dangerously low and too much fighting with others can crying foul about "poaching"
But all that can be improved on

I worked for eircom for 6 years, and unions were a large part of why the company is as inefficient as it is.

Mickey Dazzler

yes they bloody well are.

monkeypants

I think that most of these ruling come from not treating people fairly according to the company's own procedures. If everyone at the company is treated equally under whatever policies exist, then all is well. It's when Mary does X and either nothing is said or a verbal warning is issued, yet Tom gets done for gross misconduct for X, that's when the problems start.

I've done disciplinaries and dismissals before and it's easy to do it properly if you (a) don't do anything in anger (b) document everything and (c) get a second opinion before taking action.

Nodin

token101 wrote: »

I read it twice just to make sure I had it right and hadn't missed some key point.

"In a determination yesterday, the tribunal noted that the three men "accepted in their evidence that they had defrauded" the company on an "ongoing basis"."

Yet they are still entitled to compensation? What a load of s**t. They should have been sued by the company for fraud if anything! So it's ok to come into work, do nothing, sleep on the job just because no one tells you that sleeping in work isn't ok? Absolute nonsense.

I direct you to this
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=76693007&postcount=39