Employer’s Failure to Challenge Third-Party Company’s Discontinued Need for Its Employee Resulted in Unfair Dismissal Finding

In Paul Atkinson v PFH Technology Group (ADJ-00047335), the Complainant brought a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission (the “WRC”) under the Unfair Dismissals Act claiming that his redundancy was an unfair dismissal. The Adjudicator, Patsy Doyle, found that the Complainant was unfairly dismissed on a procedural ground and awarded the Complainant €17,831.39, the equivalent of 26 weeks’ pay.

Facts: The Complainant was employed by PFH Technology Group, an Information and Communications Technology Company from 5 June 2018 – 24 March 2023 as a Business Infrastructure Integrator. From October 2021, the Complainant worked a four-day week.

The Respondent placed the Complainant on the site of a different company, Company B, from his employment commencement date. The employment arrangement was described as a “Triangular employment” in which the Complainant was the subject of a Service Level Agreement (“SLA”). In November 2022, the Complainant was informed by a Services Director that his role would cease at the Company B site from December. The Respondent started a process to place the Complainant in another role at Company C, due to begin in January 2023. However, then it transpired that Company C did not require the Complainant to join as they did not have the clearance. On 19 January 2023, the Respondent put the Complainant at risk of redundancy while continuing to search for alternative roles. A two-week consultation process began on 8 February 2023 while continuing to search for redeployment opportunities. On 20 February the Complainant was placed on one month paid notice which would conclude with the Complainant’s role being made redundant if no internal role at the Respondent was secured by the Complainant.

Continue reading here

Stay informed with the latest legal developments at Global Law Experts