Blog Layout

Dismissal and Absence from Work


dismissal absence from work

Can an employee be dismissed for absenteeism?


Yes, however, an employer can only dismiss the employee concerned if the absenteeism is repeated, the employer has provided the employee with verbal and/or written warnings, afforded the employee the opportunity to improve their attendance record and undertook a disciplinary process in line with the company policies and procedures.


Case law on dismissal and absence from work


A matter recently came before the Labour Court on appeal by an employee, Mr Stephen Redmond, against the decision of the Workplace Relations Commission in his complaint against his former employer, Seetec Employment & Skills Ireland, under the Unfair Dismissals Act. Mr Redmond commenced employment with Seetec on 10 October 2016 and was subsequently dismissed on 17 June 2019.


In summary, Mr Redmond appealed the decision to dismiss him on the basis of repeated absenteeism, on the grounds that the processes and procedures leading to his dismissal were flawed. 


Despite the acceptance by both parties and the Labour Court that the repeated absenteeism of Mr Redmond were not conducive to a positive working relationship, the Labour Court noted that the employer’s practice of issuing repeated final written warnings had the effect of creating uncertainty as to the significance of the disciplinary penalties invoked. 


The Labour Court could find no basis in the written disciplinary policy of the employer for the repeated issuance of overlapping final written warnings to Mr Redmond. 


Disciplinary process and absenteeism


The Labour Court found it self evident that a coherent application of the comprehensive written disciplinary policy of the employer required the execution of the disciplinary steps in the manner described in the policy. Therefore, a strict application of the employer’s own disciplinary policies and procedures was not followed.


That being the case, the Labour Court determined that the amount of redress which was just and equitable, having regard to all of the circumstances of the case, was €5,400.


Dismissal and absence from work – conclusion


The takeaway from this case is that an employer should strictly adhere to their own disciplinary policies and procedures if they intend to evoke same for the repeated absenteeism of an employee.


Further Information


For further information, please contact the author of this article, Barry Crushell.


Share

Compensation for workplace stress & anxiety
by RG343171 11 Mar, 2024
Psychological damage is difficult to measure and quantify, making it difficult for assessors to determine its impact. The Personal Injuries Guidelines were established by the Judicial Council in 2021 under the Judicial Council Act 2019 to identify appropriate levels of damages for different forms of personal injuries. The guidelines aim to enhance understanding of the evaluation and allocation of compensation for personal injuries to achieve more uniformity in awards.
How much compensation for stress at work?
by RG343171 11 Mar, 2024
In this article, we examine the circumstances that give rise to a personal injuries claim for the stress and anxiety caused by a toxic working environment.
13 Feb, 2024
The case of Electricity Supply Board -v- Kieran Sharkey [2024] IEHC 65 examines whether an employee has a right to silence in the context of workplace investigations. The Electricity Supply Board (ESB) (the Plaintiff) brought a case against Mr Sharkey (the Defendant) alleging that his failure to answer certain questions, in the context of a workplace investigations that was also subject to parallel criminal proceedings, amounted to a repudiation of his contract of employment or, in the alternative, that the ESB was entitled to treat his contract of employment as having been terminated by him.
Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999
26 Jan, 2024
The Form 3 is used when an individual wants to make a representation to the Minister for Justice and Equality pursuant to Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999. It is an appeal to a decision of the Minister for Justice in respect of an immigration application.
Determining an Employer
03 Jan, 2024
The case of Amanda Craddock v Head–Hunt International Limited (ADJ00036831) examines the circumstances under which a redundancy payment would ordinarily be payable to an agency worker.
Claims before the WRC
18 Dec, 2023
In this article, we consider what will be considered frivolous or vexatious, by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), when a complaint is presented to them we do so by examining several claims initiated by Mr. Leon O’Connor against various companies.
Show More
Share by: