Nail bar worker wins €1,000 for unfair dismissal
Sole trader Colm Tyrell, operator of a beauty salon Love Your Nails, was directed to pay €1,000 to the worker, Odonchimeg Genenbat, for what a Workplace Relations Commission adjudicator called a 'very arbitrary dismissal without any proper procedures' last Christmas.
Ms Genenbat, a nail technician earning €260 for a 20-hour week, told a workplace rights hearing in May this year that she was hired on 26 November 2024, and was informed by text message on 27 December that her job had been 'terminated'.
Giving evidence through an interpreter, she explained that she was furnished with neither any standard employment documentation nor any payslips when she started work. She said 'all was well' until she asked for payslips on 14 December to find out her rate of pay.
READ MORE
Having taken holidays on Christmas Eve, she was told she was out of a job three days later without any of the normal procedures, interviews or appeals required in a dismissal taking place, she told the tribunal.
Ms Genenbet, who worked at the salon just over a month, argued she fell under an exception to the usual minimum requirement of 12 months' continuous service to be shielded by the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977.
She cited Section 36 of the National Minimum Wage Act 2000, stating that her request for her payslips on 14 December put her in the category of a worker who had sought information about her wages and been refused.
Adjudicator Michael McEntee recorded that her employer, Mr Tyrell, had failed to show up to the hearing on 23 May this year.
He noted an email from the employer stating that the failure to give Ms Genenbat her payslips was an 'administrative error'.
The employer wrote that he came to the 'difficult decision not to continue her employment' because of alleged 'work performance' issues.
These claimed issues were the 'inability to complete customer treatments in the time allocated' and 'customer satisfaction issues', Mr Tyrell wrote.
In his decision, Mr McEntee noted that the fact of dismissal was not in dispute and ruled that Ms Genembat was entitled to pursue her complaint despite her short service.
'Either by accident or design, the complainant was able to utilise a mechanism to have her case heard under the Unfair Dismissals Act. Accordingly, the absence of normal procedures makes the dismissal unfair, and redress has to be awarded,' he added.
He awarded €1,000 in compensation, noting Ms Genenbat's short period in employment and 'modest' wages.
Mr McEntee wrote that the employer had taken a 'somewhat cavalier approach' by failing to attend the hearing and said this was a factor in his decision.
Mr Tyrell is the first employer in over two and a half years to lose an Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 claim relying on the extension of the law to a worker who has sought a statement of pay under Section 36 of the National Minimum Wage Act 2000.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
Ireland's latest investment plan: A sceptic's guide
How do we make sense of all the billions announced in new State investment spending ? The key message is that the Government is going for it in terms of the sums it is committing – and this has big consequences. By doing so it is responding to economic growth and population increases, which have been well in advance of expectations. Here is how the numbers add up and the questions they raise. Where the money comes from : The State has allocated an additional €34 billion to its investment plans over the five years from 2026 to 2030. This is a big increase, with the overall total coming to just over €102 billion. About €20 billion of the extra cash is due to come from what might be called cash reserves – the €14 billion from the Apple tax payment, €2.5 billion from the sale of AIB shares and the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund established by the Government. This still leaves a gap to be paid for, however, and this will be met by running down budget surpluses in the years ahead. There is also a commitment to tighter control of day-to-day spending to leave more cash for investment, though an increase of 6.4 per cent is pencilled in again here next year. Tariffs: Why has Donald Trump threatened the EU again? Listen | 47:35 The State will run down a lot of its financial leeway. Already the Department of Finance is facing a smaller budget surplus year than forecast in springtime. The budget sums will come under further pressure if economic growth slows sharply. Where the money will be spent : The Government announced the overall spending allocations, but not the list of projects involved, though some of the big ones, including the Dublin MetroLink , are known. As ESRI professor Alan Barrett said on RTÉ radio, the normal approach in a National Development Plan (NDP) is to start with population and growth projections and then develop a list of projects that are based on this and outline how they relate to each other. Instead, departments are now to come up with their own priorities. The list should be published around budget time, we are told, but with the review well flagged for months, it seems a lot of last-minute haggling means it has not yet happened. As Taoiseach Micheál Martin said, previous NDPs might have been too long. But this one, right now, looks a bit flimsy. Surviving a downturn : Taoiseach Micheál Martin said at the press conference launching the strategy that the goal is to keep investing, even if the economy slows or hits difficulties. Slashing investment spending after the financial crash has had a big economic cost for the Republic. But with no details of the expected budget position next year – never mind in subsequent years – published in the summer economic statement, the other key document published on Tuesday, we have no feeling for how the Department of Finance sees all the numbers adding up. Budget surpluses will be smaller, it says, but we do not know by how much. We are not clear on the appetite to borrow to fund investment in the years ahead if the corporate tax take takes a heavy hit. In fairness, the Government will want to see the outcome of the EU-US tariff talks, which have big implications. If there is a bad outcome, we are told the €9.4 billion budget will be pulled back. That would be the acid test of where priorities lie. Delivering the projects : Senior Ministers spoke at length at the NDP launch about the barriers to delivery from planning and bureaucracy. This raises the obvious question of why they did not do much about them when they were in government last time around, including the multiphase approval processes for local authority housing, for example. A new Planning Act was passed, but only in the dying days of the last coalition. The fiscal council has noted that the State has consistently struggled to meet investment spending targets in recent years. And, as the document states, finding construction workers is a challenge. Now Minister for Public Expenditure Jack Chambers is examining recommendations from an expert group on the delivery issue, and some important moves are on the table. Succeeding here is central to its plans and rebuilding credibility on project delivery.
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on the State's new investment plans: the work is only starting
The Government's plan to invest more to address the infrastructure deficits in the Irish economy is a move in the right direction. Shortfalls in housing, water, energy and transport are not only crippling competitiveness but affecting people's daily lives. The Government is correct to push ahead with its planning, despite the international uncertainty. A growing economy and a rising population have left recent administrations running to catch up. International investors have been increasingly outspoken about Ireland's infrastructural shortfalls. All of this needs to be addressed. And Taoiseach Micheál Martin is correct when he says that State investment spending must be protected no matter what. However, the plans published yesterday raise of number of important questions. The lack of any detail of the projects to be included in the plan is somewhat puzzling. Everyone knew in the final period of the last government and the opening months of this one that the review was due. So why has no list of projects been completed? Because of this, as Prof Alan Barrett of the Economic and Social Research Institute pointed out, we do not have any of the essential detail on how the projects all fit together. READ MORE There are, of course, a significant number of projects which we do know about and which will be funded by the money now being put aside. The focus on vital areas such as water, wastewater and energy is important. But with last-minute rows over housing in particular, it is unclear that the Government yet has a convincing plan in this key area. An updated housing plan, due in the autumn, needs to give a clear view . The Government is also – belatedly – looking seriously at the blockages and delays to project planning. This is welcome but long overdue. These issues have been hiding in plain sight in recent years, leading to extraordinary delays and additional costs in projects large and small. Too much time was lost here by the last government. This one needs to get serious on the issue of the delivery. This will be uncomfortable politically and it remains to be seen if the Government has the stomach for the necessary fights. The scale of the investment commitments being made are significant. And paying for it will use a lot of the leeway in the national finances and also the cash put aside from the Apple tax payment and the sale of AIB shares. This means a higher level of risk. To create the required leeway in the national finances – and ensure yet more cash is not pumped into the economy – the increased investment spending must be combined with much tighter control of day-to-day spending. This is the trade off. If this does not happen, then the scale of the financial risks facing the State will increase yet further. And they are already high enough.
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
Budget plan for €9.4bn public spending boost will be reconsidered if tariffs hit
Plans to spend an extra €9.4 billion on public services , tax cuts and building projects next year will be reconsidered if the US imposes tariffs on EU imports, Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe and Minister for Public Expenditure Jack Chambers said on Tuesday. But they, along with Taoiseach Micheál Martin and Tánaiste Simon Harris , pledged that if there is pressure on spending plans, they would protect infrastructure budgets and cut growth in current spending on public services, welfare and tax cuts to realise the necessary savings. The Coalition leaders launched a review of the National Development Plan (NDP), promising to spend €100 billion between now and 2030 – a €30 billion increase over what was planned – to improve water, energy, transport and housing infrastructure. [ National Development Plan shows the Government is about to bet big on capital expenditure Opens in new window ] The ambitious plans were overshadowed by the threat of a trade war between the European Union and United States, which Mr Donohoe and Mr Chambers admitted could compel them to revise plans published on Tuesday for a budget day package of €9.4 billion in October. READ MORE In the event of high tariffs, the Government would 'recalibrate its fiscal strategy' and reduce the budget package to keep public finances stable, said Mr Donohoe. Already, the plans for October's Budget 2026 envisage growth in public spending being trimmed from 8-9 per cent of recent years to 6.4 per cent next year. Mr Donohoe said there would be a package of tax cuts of some €1.5 billion. But he added that the cost of cutting VAT on hospitality – a Fine Gael election promise included in the programme for government – would amount to nearly €1 billion in a full year, meaning the scope for any tax adjustments to rates and bands would be reduced significantly. Tariffs: Why has Donald Trump threatened the EU again? Listen | 47:35 'It would not be right to grow the scale of our tax package,' said Mr Donohoe. The Coalition published the amended NDP and summer economic statement at Government Buildings on Tuesday. The NDP promises expenditure of €25 billion on capital projects in 2026, with the amount increasing every year and peaking at €28 billion in 2029. The total is set to reach more than €100 billion by 2030. The plan was immediately criticised for not identifying individual projects, though the Government did point to a small number of 'megaprojects', including the Dublin Metro and two big water schemes: the Shannon to Dublin water supply project and Greater Dublin Area drainage initiative. Social Democrats spokesman on public expenditure Cian O'Callaghan said the plan is 'so vague it doesn't even rise to the level of wish list'. Sinn Féin 's health spokesman David Cullinane said the allocation for health falls 'far short of what is needed' over the next five years. Labour 's Marie Sherlock, meanwhile, has said the €2 billion allocated for the MetroLink is 'hardly a vote of confidence that the project will be substantively progressed in this decade'. The summer economic statement, normally a key document in the preparation of the October budget, was considerably shorter and less detailed than usual. It contained several warnings, however, about threats to the State's public finances from several sources. [ NDP shows Government about to bet big on capital expenditure Opens in new window ] 'Even before the full impact of tariffs takes hold, it is increasingly evident that heightened levels of uncertainty have prompted firms to delay investment plans and households to step up precautionary savings. These headwinds are set to slow the pace of economic expansion,' it said. The document also warned that the 'headline surplus is now likely to be considerably lower than set out in the spring'. It flagged that spending pressures in several Government departments will require additional funding above their agreed allocations, prompting Mr Chambers to warn of the need for spending discipline and an end to bailouts in the second half of the year – a now familiar necessity in some departments.
