Exec chef who was offered role in China before unfair dismissal awarded €57k

Irish Daily Mirror

14-05-2025

An Executive Chef at Avoca's Monkstown restaurant in south Dublin was offered a chef role in China by his employer during the Covid-19 pandemic before being unfairly dismissed through redundancy.
At the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), Adjudicator Davnet O'Driscoll ordered Avoca Handweavers Shops Limited to pay Mark McGillycuddy €57,166 for his unfair dismissal in November 2020.
Ms O'Driscoll stated she was not satisfied that the Avoca firm had discharged the burden of proof to show there were substantial grounds justifying the dismissal of Mr McGillycuddy for redundancy.
In the case, Mr McGillycuddy had worked at Avoca's Monkstown restaurant since 2010.
He said that he was told his role as Executive Chef with the company was at risk due to Covid-19 in September 2020 and the company were looking at alternative roles for him.
Avoca Handweavers Shops Limited is part of the US-headquartered Aramark, which operates in 15 countries across four continents.
Mr McGillycuddy was told that revenue was down 33 per cent at the Avoca firm in July and yearly revenue was down by 22 per cent due to Covid-19.
At a third consultation meeting, Mr McGillycuddy was offered a role in China and was asked whether he believed this would be suitable.
On November 4 2020, Mr McGillycuddy was informed that he was made redundant, with his last payment on November 13 2020.
On behalf of Mr McGillycuddy, Setanta Landers at Setanta Solicitors argued that the pandemic was used as a mask to justify the redundancy.
Mr McGillycuddy argued that the process 'was an artificial and sham process', and that the employee with the longest service was selected.
In evidence, Mr McGillycuddy told the hearing that he did not know why he was selected for redundancy. He did not feel the company was looking for an alternative role for him and said he felt it was a box-tick exercise.
He said the only role that was available was the position of Chef in China or entry-level roles.
In her findings, Ms O'Driscoll accepts that the Avoca firm was adversely financially impacted by the pandemic, and restructuring of the business was consequently required.
Ms O'Driscoll found that the Avoca firm did not act reasonably in consulting with Mr McGillycuddy regarding the alternative roles available. She said: "The dismissal is unfair.'
Ms O'Driscoll stated that it was notable that evidence has been given of the advertisement of two Chef Manager roles in the restructuring, but Mr McGillycuddy was not aware of the two roles.
Ms O'Driscoll stated that Mr McGillycuddy was agreeable to taking a similar role or a step down in order to remain in employment.
In response, the Avoca firm refuted that Mr McGillycuddy was unfairly dismissed.
The company stated that it behaved reasonably and that it engaged in a full consultation process with Mr McGillycuddy.
The firm stated that it was only after all possible alternatives to redundancy were considered, including seeking suitable alternative roles, that a decision was made to confirm the redundancy of his role.
The company stated that Mr McGillycuddy was afforded the right to fair procedures at all times.