WRC finds Pat the Baker driver was unfairly dismissed

A woman who worked as a van driver for Pat The Baker and claimed to have been “treated like an animal” by a third-party shop manager was unfairly dismissed from her position, the Workplace Relations Commission has decided.”

Patricia Groarke was employed as a van salesperson with Pat The Baker from November 14, 2022, to November 15, 2023, the latter date on which, she submitted, she was unfairly dismissed.

Ms Groarke submitted to the WRC the details of an incident at a SuperValu that took place while on duty on November 11, 2023, which resulted in her quitting her employment. Following that incident, Ms Groarke said she was given an opportunity to reconsider her position by her employer.

In her decision, WRC adjudicating officer Emer O’Shea said the subsequent offer to reconsider, made to the claimant, was withdrawn and she was dismissed unfairly.

In her complaint to the WRC, Ms Groarke submitted she arrived at a premises on November 11, 2023, to find another company’s produce on the shelf she had been using since she commenced employment. When the claimant started to move the items, the manager of the shop told her the shelf was “never yours”. Ms Groarke said the shop manager was speaking “whilst laughing at her in a belittling way”.

Ms Groarke said she attempted to call her line manager to attend but to no avail. The line manager then called her to say that he had spoken with the shop manager who alleged that Ms Groarke had thrown the produce and that it was on camera. Ms Groarke denied this and asked her line manager to check the cameras, adding that the shop manager was dismissive towards her and treated her “with no dignity or respect”.

Ms Groarke submitted that she felt she was being “treated like an animal” and that the manager of the shop asked her: “Was she thick?”

The respondent, Pat The Baker, submitted that there was no jurisdiction to hear the complaint, as the claimant did not have the requisite one-year service at the time of the resignation. The respondent submitted that no dismissal had taken place and that the claimant resigned of her own volition.

On the day of November 11, 2023, Ms Groarke’s manager said he received a WhatsApp message from Ms Groarke stating that she was resigning from her position. As a response, the manager said he attempted contacting the claimant but to no avail.

Ms Groarke later told her manager: “No, I’ve told you I’m done, not going to be spoken to like s***. Ive never let yee down always done what I was asked and enough is enough thanks for everything.”

The manager requested that the claimant work out her notice period. However, Ms Groarke said: “I’ve quit, not handed in my notice”. The manager responded: “So, that is that, you have finished as of today?” with Ms Groarke replying: “yes”.

On November 14, 2023, Ms Groarke wrote to the HR generalist: “I’ve been thinking a lot about things since we had the phone call yesterday and if I was to consider going back, what are the chances of a pay-rise, as if money was to improve somewhat it might make my decision easier”. On November 15, Ms Groarke requested that she return to the same role.

On the same day, the HR generalist responded, explaining that she was not aware that the claimant had resigned in writing, by text, and that unfortunately, her role had been filled.

In finding for Ms Groarke, Ms O’Shea said: “I find that a reasonable employer would have allowed the claimant to revoke her resignation and their refusal to do so amounted to a dismissal.”

“The respondent effected the termination of employment without any investigation and without adherence to fair procedures. Consequently, I am upholding the complaint of unfair dismissal,” said Ms O’Shea.

Ms O’Shea then recommended a payment of €3,500, adding that “in all of the circumstances, I find that the date of dismissal was November 15, 2023, and consequently the claimant had the requisite period of service to have locus standi under the Act”