Introduction
While an employee may often win their claim of unfair dismissal, an Adjudication Officer may reduce the amount awarded on foot of the conduct of that employee.
In this article, we review a number of cases that involve employees who were successful in their claims of unfair dismissal, but who had their compensation reduced to reflect the fact that their own conduct had contributed to their dismissal.
Jacinta Doyle v River Island Clothing Co. (Ireland) Ltd (ADJ-00029939)
In this case the Adjudication Officer noted the refusal of the Complainant to engage in the appeals process. It was stated that: “In terms of a standard Unfair Dismissals case, this refusal is very detrimental to the complainant. There is extensive case law to support this point”.
The Adjudication Officer upheld the complaint under section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act,1977. However, only €1000 was awarded to the Complainant due to the fact that “the dismissal was unfair on procedural grounds but with a very significant Complainant counterweight”.
A PM/ Complainant v A Food Producer (ADJ-00023204)
In this case, despite finding that the Complainant had been unfairly dismissed, the Adjudication Officer noted that the Complainant’s conduct had contributed to the decision to dismiss him.
This conduct included the Complainant’s “attitude, his demeanour, his lack of trust in his employer – setting them up with recorded meetings, his repeated argumentative approach at meetings and his repeated references to wanting an offer to leave.” In the opinion of the Adjudication Officer, all of these actions had “undoubtedly contributed to his own downfall”.
As a result of this, the Adjudication Officer concluded that the compensation to be awarded to the Complainant should be reduced by 60%.
A Senior Receptionist v A Boutique Hotel (ADJ-00016679)
In this case, the Adjudication Officer found that the Complainant had been unfairly dismissed.
In considering the amount of compensation to be awarded, the Adjudication Officer noted section 7(1)(c) of the Unfair Dismissals Act,1977 which states that when considering the issue of compensation, an Adjudication Officer must consider what is “just and equitable having regard to all the circumstances”.
He also noted section 7(2)(f) which states that the complainant’s contribution to the situation must be taken into account.
The Adjudication Officer concluded that the actions of the Complainant in this case warranted a reduction of 25% in the amount of compensation to be awarded. It was held that the Complainant had contributed to his own dismissal by acting in an intimidatory manner towards a Ms. XF.
Motor Mechanic v A Transport Company (ADJ-00021420)
Similarly, in this case the Adjudication Officer concluded that the Complainant had been dismissed as a form of penalisation under the Safety, Health & Welfare at Work Act,2005.
However, they acknowledged that the employee had made a significant contribution to the situation. Therefore, the compensation to be awarded was reduced in order to reflect this.
Key Takeaways
What both employers and employees should take away from these cases is that while an employee may be found to be unfairly dismissed, the compensation awarded to them will be reduced to reflect the contribution that they have made to their own downfall.
Therefore, before employees decide to take a claim, they should consider to what extent their own actions contributed to the dismissal.
