How to deal with instant dismissal in Ireland?

FamousBelgian

A friend of mine has been summarily dismissed from his job after 17 years of service and doesn't know where to turn. I'd like to find out something to help him follow the procedures for unfair dismissal because at the moment it is causing huge distress and I'm afraid he will accept the situation.

It appears to be a clear case of bullying with severe side effects. The employer seems to want to make an example and starts with an employee they judge might easily roll over and accept the situation.

He's been working as a qualified engineer in a multinational production facility for 17+ years without incident and has been rewarded for good performance on a number of occasions. This year a new manager took over the facility and it seems that there was some personality conflict. In November the engineer was accused of not following some internal procedures and the issue was escalated to a disciplinary case. Short story long, the engineer was fired for reason the day before Xmas and given two weeks to appeal the decision (at a time of year when finding a lawyer is difficult). All the 'appeals' and 'hearings' are internal events with the same people judging and documenting events in favour of the employee.

I would appreciate some anecdotal evidence to support a case for fighting such an employer.

I would guess that the employee would need to find an employment lawyer who can deal with the employer's large Dublin law firm to reach a settlement along the lines of a redundancy package. I presume they would need to ignore the company's internal 'procedures' as hopelessly biased and unfair and force the company to explain why they didn't just issue a slap on the wrist if indeed there were substantive issues with the employee.

Again, not asking for specific legal advice as that's against the rules of the forum, just hoping to hear some experiences.

Avatar MIA

Yes, get a good lawyer. Most of the household name law firms won't take the employee side, so you'll need to do some research.

Giving someone two weeks time just before Christmas will be laughed out of the WRC. It's all about procedures.

FishOnABike

If your friend is thinking of just rolling over he should consider what redundancy with 17 years service would be. You're talking about in the region of two years gross salary. Personally, I wouldn't be able to walk away without a fight.

It sounds like this new manager has come in from a location with 'at will' employment laws and doesn't appreciate the rules are different here.

If your friend stands up for himself this manager could be in for an expensive and career limiting awakening.

FamousBelgian

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Unpopular opinion here maybe, but are you sure your friend is telling you the entire story? It is not 'normal' for large multinationals to fire people for no reason. They usually have pretty strict processes on this, and the firing would need to be green lit by the department manager, director, head of HR, and probably the GM.

I've been a manager a long time and it never ceases to amaze me how employees are unable to take responsibility for their bad behaviour. For example, I have known many staff (in Ireland) who were hungover almost daily, unable to do their jobs properly, and when they eventually got fired for this, they became (in their minds and amongst their friends and colleagues) innocent victims of evil corporations.

I'm not saying your friend is guilty. I'm saying please make sure he is being truly honest with himself before going down the legal route.

I hope he is able to get his life back on track.

I take your point and I understand it because I've also been a manager hiring (and being pressured to fire) people. In my 30+ years of working (nearly all abroad) I've only ever come across one individual worthy of dismissal; incompetent employees, on the other hand, were only the result of poor hiring and management. I've been involved with a lot of hiring and some firing but this was only ever done in the context of reorganisation. In most cases there was skullduggery in terms of the selection and justification but nobody had their reputation destroyed or went uncompensated.

This individual is someone I've known well since university so I believe their story. They aren't even in the position to do anything worthy of instant dismissal; they admit to possibly taking the same shortcuts or expediencies as anyone else following the practices in use there. It's like a taxi driver being fired for speeding by 10km/h but under pressure to drive quickly. I suspect that this person may have taken some principled stand on an issue of safety given that they were under huge cost-cutting pressure. Maybe its political naivete but there wasn't anything fraudulent or criminal or worthy of instant dismissal.

I think the issue here is that the person has been targetted at year-end and given no chance to defend themselves. Procedures aren't being followed so as to overwhelm them and, if successful, make an example.

I've been googling and I've found a few instance of 'misconduct' being used as a catch-all to do this to people and then intimidate them with rapid-fire 'appeals' like Soviet-era show trials.

I live in Holland and there the burden of proof is 100% on the employer. It's easy to make people redundant but you can only fire people if you have strictly followed procedures.

drunkmonkey

Why does he need a lawyer to appeal the decision, is that not something that should be discussed with management and HR.
I'd contact Nera asap and get their advice.

FamousBelgian

FishOnABike wrote: »

If your friend is thinking of just rolling over he should consider what redundancy with 17 years service would be. You're talking about in the region of two years gross salary. Personally, I wouldn't be able to walk away without a fight.

It sounds like this new manager has come in from a location with 'at will' employment laws and doesn't appreciate the rules are different here.

If your friend stands up for himself this manager could be in for an expensive and career limiting awakening.

My opinion exactly. I believe that the new boss came straight from the US with a cost-cutting mission. This on top of years of cost-cutting.

I experienced something similar with a boss from came from a different jurisdiction so I understand. That boss was fired himself.

Plumbthedepths

Someone should point the manager to the recent case of a Tesco worker who received a 4k award for being sacked without proper procedure being followed.

FamousBelgian

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Why does he need a lawyer to appeal the decision, is that not something that should be discussed with management and HR.
I'd contact Nera asap and get their advice.

The appeal, decision, HR, management are all one and the same in this case. There's no fair procedure and it's all internal to the company so doesn't have any real legal standing.

ArthurG

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Someone should point the manager to the recent case of a Tesco worker who received a 4k award for being sacked without proper procedure being followed.

Based on the OPs info, I’d suspect that 4K is less than one months salary for the individual involved.

Avatar MIA

FamousBelgian wrote: »

... and it's all internal to the company so doesn't have any real legal standing.

Being internal is not damning, and you'd expect a large MN to have good HRM.

Plumbthedepths

ArthurG wrote:

Based on the OPs info, I’d suspect that 4K is less than one months salary for the individual involved.

The award was higher but due to the nature of why the Tesco employee was sacked the amount was reduced. An award was made due to the failure of Tesco to adhere to proper procedure that is why I referenced it.

Stheno

This doesn't sound like instant dismissal given the incident happened in November and he was let go late December. Given he has the ability to appeal I'd also wonder if he's been suspended without pay pending the asppeal

There also seems to have been an investigation. Was your friend involved in meetings etc to discuss this?

Did he say why he was dismissed? Gross misconduct?

FamousBelgian

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Being internal is not damning, and you'd expect a large MN to have good HRM.

"Good" HRM is a whole other discussion.

In this case it's a few individuals doing the bidding of a boss in a facility removed from the rest of the organisation.

FamousBelgian

Stheno wrote: »

This doesn't sound like instant dismissal given the incident happened in November and he was let go late December. Given he has the ability to appeal I'd also wonder if he's been suspended without pay pending the asppeal

There also seems to have been an investigation. Was your friend involved in meetings etc to discuss this?

Did he say why he was dismissed? Gross misconduct?

I believe there was some process like an audit in November but the dismissal was instant in December (no written warnings, disciplinary action, nothing). Don't know the details about the suspension/pay side of things but I do believe they used the misconduct argument which they used on people before when they are bullied out after long service.

It sounded to me like taking advantage of a minor transgression, committed by everyone as a matter of course and expediency, that if it were an issue would have been dealt with very long before the 17 years stage. A bit like a committed, reliable worker who likes to work late and manage their own time and suddenly a new boss decides to fire them for not being at their desk 9 to 5 even though the job frequently demands otherwise.

Stheno

FamousBelgian wrote: »

I believe there was some process like an audit in November but the dismissal was instant in December (no written warnings, disciplinary action, nothing). Don't know the details about the suspension/pay side of things but I do believe they used the misconduct argument which they used on people before when they are bullied out after long service.

It sounded to me like taking advantage of a minor transgression, committed by everyone as a matter of course and expediency, that if it were an issue would have been dealt with very long before the 17 years stage. A bit like a committed, reliable worker who likes to work late and manage their own time and suddenly a new boss decides to fire them for not being at their desk 9 to 5 even though the job frequently demands otherwise.

Gross misconduct can result in immediate dismissal if proven

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/dismissal/fair_grounds_for_dismissal.html

FamousBelgian

Stheno wrote: »

Gross misconduct can result in immediate dismissal if proven

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/dismissal/fair_grounds_for_dismissal.html

Yes, I read that, and it seems that's why companies use it. It's probably also ideal for bosses who fly in from the US who want instant cost savings by year-end.

It puts the burden of proof on the employee immediately because they have to request all the details and contest them with the benefit of the doubt given to the employer.

Let's say a customer reports a bug in code and you do a quick fix and test for one case only. You then bypass QA because that's what everyone does when the customer is screaming. The customer gets the fix and is happy but a sudden audit shows you took a shortcut because of the situation. Is that "misconduct"? Some employers will happily think so. I think that's the situation here and I don't envy this person.

Stheno

FamousBelgian wrote: »

Yes, I read that, and it seems that's why companies use it. It's probably also ideal for bosses who fly in from the US who want instant cost savings by year-end.

It puts the burden of proof on the employee immediately because they have to request all the details and contest them with the benefit of the doubt given to the employer.

Let's say a customer reports a bug in code and you do a quick fix and test for one case only. You then bypass QA because that's what everyone does when the customer is screaming. The customer gets the fix and is happy but a sudden audit shows you took a shortcut because of the situation. Is that "misconduct"? Some employers will happily think so. I think that's the situation here and I don't envy this person.

Thats not something anyone here can answer tbh it depends on many different factors. Your friend needs to document the entire timeline of what happened as there are gaps in the version you have posted and talk to Her a and/or a solicitor

Avatar MIA

FamousBelgian wrote: »

Yes, I read that, and it seems that's why companies use it. It's probably also ideal for bosses who fly in from the US who want instant cost savings by year-end.

It puts the burden of proof on the employee immediately because they have to request all the details and contest them with the benefit of the doubt given to the employer.

Let's say a customer reports a bug in code and you do a quick fix and test for one case only. You then bypass QA because that's what everyone does when the customer is screaming. The customer gets the fix and is happy but a sudden audit shows you took a shortcut because of the situation. Is that "misconduct"? Some employers will happily think so. I think that's the situation here and I don't envy this person.

There is no way a person could be fired for gross misconduct without consequences given the above scenario.

drunkmonkey

Is this a telecoms company by any chance. Hasn't there been some shannagans with employees by a new management.

Stheno

Avatar MIA wrote: »

There is no way a person could be fired for gross misconduct without consequences given the above scenario.

I'm not sure that's true. In pharma e.g. not doing the qa could result in a failed audit against stringent standards. I worked in a financial services company where failure to follow process like change was defined as gross misconduct also. Thats an extreme example I know which is why I said it depends and why ops friend needs to document everything and get appropriate advice.

rd1izb7lvpuksx

Stheno wrote: »

I'm not sure that's true. In pharma e.g. not doing the qa could result in a failed audit against stringent standards. Thats an extreme example I know which is why I said it depends.

Yes, there are various regulated industries where this could be gross misconduct.

Avatar MIA

Stheno wrote: »

I'm not sure that's true. In pharma e.g. not doing the qa could result in a failed audit against stringent standards. Thats an extreme example I know which is why I said it depends.

Going by the above scenario where there are no warnings, no prior disciplinary history or staff retraining instance. Not a hope someone is going to be eligible for sacking under Gross Misconduct for not following a procedure on a once off.

Stheno

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Going by the above scenario where there are no warnings, no prior disciplinary history or staff retraining instance. Not a hope someone is going to be eligible for sacking under Gross Misconduct for not following a procedure on a once off.

The op didnt say irs a one off he said their friend admitted to taking the same short cuts as others though. If an audit were to show up a series of short cuts taken thats far from a one off.

Anyway like I said imo there are too many gaps in this story. Op has gone from talking about an engineer in a manufacturing environment taking shortcuts to someone implanting code changes without doing QA. They don't appear to know the full facts and without those it's pointless hypothesising.

Avatar MIA

Micheal Plain Vodka wrote: »

Yes, there are various regulated industries where this could be gross misconduct.

It would have to be specifically stated in the company policy/employee contract that not carrying out a Q&A was considered Gross Misconduct. Employees are allowed make mistakes and being able to summarily dismiss someone after 17 years is not going to be easy.

Stheno

Avatar MIA wrote: »

It would have to be specifically stated in the company policy/employee contract that not carrying out a Q&A was considered Gross Misconduct. Employees are allowed make mistakes and being able to summarily dismiss someone after 17 years is not going to be easy.

Agree with this. If that's the case here and the local employers were taking shortcuts despite the policy and an audit identified this resulting in the dismissal that's a different story than that the op is telling

"Everyone does it this way" is not a defens if the policy stipulated doing something a different way and clearly outlined gross misconduct as a consequence

Franz Von Peppercorn

The employment lawyer would know more about this but with GDPR I believe he can access all of these reports, performance reports, disciplinary hearings (or lack off) and probably any report or email about that employee

Avatar MIA

Stheno wrote: »

The op didnt say irs a one off he said their friend admitted to taking the same short cuts as others though. If an audit were to show up a series of short cuts taken thats far from a one off.

Anyway like I said imo there are too many gaps in this story. Op has gone from talking about an engineer in a manufacturing environment taking shortcuts to someone implanting code changes without doing QA. They don't appear to know the full facts and without those it's pointless hypothesising.

He said at the start that the employee has not had an incident and has been rewarded for performance. But I was specifically replying to the narrow scenario in the OP's last post.

However, even if his friend had been doing it for years it wouldn't matter, it would have been the first time the company's procedures brought it to his attention. Therefore the company was also at fault.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Stheno wrote: »

The op didnt say irs a one off he said their friend admitted to taking the same short cuts as others though. If an audit were to show up a series of short cuts taken thats far from a one off.

Anyway like I said imo there are too many gaps in this story. Op has gone from talking about an engineer in a manufacturing environment taking shortcuts to someone implanting code changes without doing QA. They don't appear to know the full facts and without those it's pointless hypothesising.

The second scenario was an example, I believe, of the type of thing many companies do. The op didn’t want to get specific on the actual industry and specific complaint.

Stheno

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The second scenario was an example, I believe, of the type of thing many companies do. The op didn’t want to get specific on the actual industry and specific complaint.

T hats fair enough but without specifics ops question cannot be answered

FamousBelgian

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The second scenario was an example, I believe, of the type of thing many companies do. The op didn’t want to get specific on the actual industry and specific complaint.

It's not the software industry and I don't want to say too much in case he gets in trouble for talking about it publicly. I won't even send him the link to this discussion.

I just used that scenario as an example I'm familiar with. In one place I worked a request came around for a list of names for the chop because "there was money in the budget for it" (that's how cynical some places are). I didn't see the list early on but a friend did. One 55yo software tester was on it because some disaster of a system had so many bugs in it and he didn't find them all. He survived, though, when they found some others who had taken a bit too much sick leave. All of this done under the pretense of a fair selection for economic reasons. I'm telling you, even with full employee protection, some employers do nasty things without ever thinking of the personal consequences.

FamousBelgian

Avatar MIA wrote: »

He said at the start that the employee has not had an incident and has been rewarded for performance. But I was specifically replying to the narrow scenario in the OP's last post.

However, even if his friend had been doing it for years it wouldn't matter, it would have been the first time the company's procedures brought it to his attention. Therefore the company was also at fault.

You make a good point there. It seems like the company procedures are at fault with people ignoring minor issues or approving things verbally but then someone gets caught over a harmless rounding error on paper made under pressure. Harmless in that it can be rectified and has no measurable effects on the company's outputs.

Sure, I don't know all the facts. I'm just trying to help and support a friend who got this news just before Xmas and whose life is upside right now. There are a lot of good points in this thread and I will distill them for him when it's right. In the meantime he has agreed to engage a proper employment lawyer away from this environment.

rd1izb7lvpuksx

Avatar MIA wrote: »

It would have to be specifically stated in the company policy/employee contract that not carrying out a Q&A was considered Gross Misconduct. Employees are allowed make mistakes and being able to summarily dismiss someone after 17 years is not going to be easy.

I'm not sure that it would have to be specifically stated. An employee bypassing normal QA procedures, especially in the regulated industries that I've worked in, would very likely be considered gross misconduct, even if not explicitly enumerated in a policy.

I definitely agree that employees can make mistakes - but in the hypothetical case here, we're talking about deliberately bypassing normal QA, hence the misconduct.

Even so, I wouldn't imagine a company would summarily dismiss an employee without first suspending them with pay, conducting an investigation, and presenting the results to the employee and their representation. I know technically that you can summarily dismiss for gross misconduct, but I'd imagine taking each step in turn would give the employer the best case if they had to later defend an unfair dismissal case.

Avatar MIA

Donny,

It would have to be referenced in some way to qualify for Gross Misconduct. For it to be Gross Misconduct it has to be important enough to highlight. Otherwise it's not going to pass the WRC.

Stheno

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Donny,

It would have to be referenced in some way to qualify for Gross Misconduct. For it to be Gross Misconduct it has to be important enough to highlight. Otherwise it's not going to pass the WRC.

I agree otherwise it's too woolly. In one of the places I referred to it very clearly called out specific acts which were gross misconduct such as not following the change process

Mr. Incognito

Good morning

1. See a solicitor

2. The Statue on Employment Cases is 6 months from the date of dismissal .

3. See a solicitor.

4. It looks like a good case on the basis of the information here.

5. See a solicitor.

FamousBelgian

<Mod snip.>

I believe he is now going to consult with a solicitor who already dealt with someone from the same company who was in a similar situation.

The general consensus here seems to be that he may have a strong case for unfair dismissal based on an arbitrary reading of what constitutes 'gross misconduct' and lack of adherence to legally established procedures.