The ‘One Year’ Calculation Mistake
A recent WRC case highlights the importance of following fair procedures and understanding the requirements of employment law in relation to dismissals. The complainant, Mr Ryan McAuley, raised an Unfair Dismissal claim against Miniso Ireland Limited after he was dismissed on the 359th day of his employment.
Background
Mr McAuley began his employment with Miniso Ireland on 30th April 2022 as a Shop Assistant. He was then promoted to Supervisor in September 2022. However, on 24th April 2023, he was abruptly dismissed. On that day, he had started his work shift at 10:00, as rostered. However, shortly after 12:00, he was called to the office of his manager, Ms Chloe Yi. He was handed a dismissal letter, stating unsatisfactory performance and that his employment was therefore terminated with immediate effect. Mr McAuley questioned the reason for his dismissal and was taken aback by the explanation given by Ms Yi.
Mr McAuley had never received any warnings, either informal or formal, or been the subject of any disciplinary procedure. Following the dismissal, he sought clarification about the termination. He received support from Citizens Information, but the matter was not resolved, so his claim proceeded to a Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) hearing.
Employment Law
An employee is usually required to have one year of service to raise an Unfair Dismissal claim (there are certain exceptions, such as for whistleblowers, but these weren’t relevant in this case). Whilst 359 days would initially appear to be less than the ‘one year’ required, The Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act clarifies that if an employee accepts payment in lieu of notice (PILON), the termination date will be ‘the date on which notice, if given, would have expired.’ For Mr McAuley, this meant his service was calculated to end on the 366th day of his employment, making him eligible to claim Unfair Dismissal.
Conclusion
Mr McAuley attended the hearing, supported by a representative from the North Dublin Citizens Information Service. The respondent did not attend the hearing.
The WRC Adjudication Officer concluded the complaint was well founded; Mr McAuley had been unfairly dismissed. The respondent was ordered to pay him €9,750 in compensation.
Takeaways for Employers
This case serves as a reminder of the importance of adhering to fair procedures and understanding the nuances of employment legislation.
Bright Contracts clients have access to a wide variety of employment resources to help ensure their practices are fair, legally compliant, and conducive to a positive work environment. Please visit our website or contact a member of our team to find out more about the support we can offer you.
