O'Hagan v Ballymaconnell Private Nursing...

Facts:

• The claimant, a registered manager, was unfairly dismissed by the respondent, Mr. Wilson, who was the registered provider.
• The claimant was required to attend a disciplinary hearing in case of breach of company rules.
• An on-call duty rota was non-existent, leading the claimant to be on call seven days a week.
• Disagreements arose when the claimant raised concerns about unsafe staffing levels and was asked to remove references to them by the respondent.
• The claimant's persistent demands for additional staff during night shifts and a larger bonus payment were key issues leading to his dismissal.
• The respondent admitted that the claimant's representations about the bonus were a factor in his dismissal.
• The claimant believed he was dismissed due to raising health and safety concerns and dissatisfaction with the lack of a significant bonus payment.
• The claimant had a temporary managerial position at another nursing home but was dismissed following a probation review due to various criticisms.

Issues:

1. Whether the claimant's dismissal was unfair due to his persistent demands for additional staff and a larger bonus payment.

2. Whether the respondent's failure to follow statutory procedures and the claimant's lack of continuous employment contributed to his unfair dismissal.

Decision:

• The tribunal unanimously found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed by the respondent.
• The tribunal awarded compensation of 17,444.53 to the claimant.
• The tribunal determined that the principal reasons for the claimant's dismissal were his persistent demands for more staff on duty at night and a bigger bonus payment.
• The tribunal held that the claimant had mitigated his loss and there was no contributory fault on his part.
• An uplift of 30% on the compensation was awarded due to the respondent's deliberate decision not to follow statutory procedures.

Rationale:

• The tribunal found that the respondent's failure to address the claimant's concerns about staffing and bonus payments, as well as the lack of performance evidence, were key factors in the unfair dismissal.
• The tribunal determined that the claimant's dismissal fell under Article 132(1) of The Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996, making it automatically unfair.
• The tribunal considered it just and equitable to award the claimant an uplift in compensation due to the respondent's calculated decision not to follow statutory procedures.

Conclusion:

The tribunal concluded that the claimant was unfairly dismissed by the respondent primarily due to his persistent demands for additional staff during night shifts and a larger bonus payment. The tribunal awarded compensation and an uplift as a result of the unfair dismissal.

[End of Case Brief]