New article

If an employee terminates his or her employment and then claims constructive dismissal under unfair dismissals legislation, then the employee must be able to prove the resignation was justified. 

In general an employee must have 12 months continuous service with the employer before a claim for unfair dismissal can be taken. Constructive dismissal can occur when an employer has acted unreasonably or where conduct by fellow employees goes unchecked by the employer. 

It is important that any internal company grievance has been used prior to resignation. It is then up to the employee to prove that the resignation was justified and that he/she was left with no alternative.

A former employee of a DIY store group has been awarded €12,480 after the Employment Appeals Tribunal concluded that the claimant had been constructively dismissed.
The claimant told the Tribunal that the atmosphere at work in the store had changed dramatically following the arrival of a new store manageress. She subsequently started to pick on people and would have tantrums if one did not go on break on time.
In spring 2002 the situation got worse. Name calling started. Words like flirt and floozy were used. C (the claimant) was known as the ‘blond bimbo.’ M (the manager) called her these names. No one else did.”

In one incident, the claimant said that she was helping an old man when M called out on the tannoy (loudspeaker) that C was a ‘flirt’. Some weeks, she would be M’s ‘best buddy’. Other weeks she would be “walking on egg shells”.

CASH TILL SHORTAGE
A series of incidents was recounted. Disciplinary action was threatened over a small shortage in the cash till. The manager introduced a new rule that anyone with more than €10 up or down in their till would be disciplined.

One day, ‘M’ asked the claimant why she had not left the company. She advised her “to start looking for another job”. In May 2005, the claimant handed in her notice. She “could not listen to the name calling and verbal abuse any longer”.
Another employee at the store gave evidence on behalf of the claimant. She recalled receiving a warning letter for being one minute late from ‘M’, who “called her things”.

In her evidence on behalf of the respondent, ‘M’ denied the claims. She insisted that she ‘got on fine’ with the claimant and denied calling her a ‘blond bimbo’. She did not recall the incident concerning the till.
This e-newsletter provides general information on Irish employment Law and good practice. This e-newsletter is provided for information purposes only which may not address the particular circumstances of your organisation.

The content in this e-newsletter is NOT a legal interpretation of any matter and should not be seen as such. For professional or legal advice you should consult a suitably qualified person.