Allegations of unfair dismissal against the social services centre in Castlebar have emerged following RTÉ’s Prime Time programme which aired on Tuesday night and which investigated complaints against FÁS made by the chairman of Castlebar Social Services.
Eddie Hoban, a retired employee of FÁS and a voluntary worker with the organisation since 1996, told the Mayo Advertiser this week that two former employees of Castlebar Social Services Ltd took unfair dismissal cases.
The first, Joe O’Grady, told the Advertiser his case for constructive dismissal was settled for an undisclosed sum during court proceedings in the civil circuit court in Castlebar.
The second, a woman who took her case to an Employment Appeals Tribunal in February 2005, was awarded €8,385 as a result of being unfairly dismissed by Social Services.
The compensation, amounting to approximately €25,000, was paid to the two former employees by the Social Services. Mr O’Grady told the Mayo Advertiser how he worked in social services as treasurer on a voluntary basis for three years. In August 2003 the co-ordinator retired and Mr O’Grady, following an interview in front of a panel of three, was awarded the job which he commenced in September of that year.
He claimed that due to the “situation and conduct of the chairperson at the time” he had to resign in April 2004 and subsequently took a case for constructive dismissal in June 2007. Court proceedings were initiated but settled for an undisclosed sum during the course of the trial and before the defence was submitted.
He said during his time working in social services there was never a problem with money, as claimed by the documentary, with the organisation realising substantial rental income from the building in Castle Street carpark.
Referring to a remark made by the chairman, PJ Nally, on Prime Time that the organisation couldn’t afford a Christmas tree some years ago because they were so cash strapped, he said there was ample funding for a tree and in fact the organisation hosted two Christmas parties that same year.
He refuted Mr Nally’s claims and said he (O’Grady ) wanted to erect a Christmas tree in the hallway of the building but he wasn’t allowed on health and safety grounds because the chairman feared that older people would trip over it. There was a smaller tree standing on a table in one of the rooms.
Mr O’Grady said the secretary who was appointed late in 2003, Maria Mulvihill, was subsequently dismissed from her job. She took an unfair dismissal case against the social services to the Employment Appeals Tribunal and won her case. Ms Mulvihill became an employee in 1998 and then went on maternity leave in 2003. In the mean time the co-ordinator resigned and a permanent replacement was taken on in 2003. The tribunal heard that Ms Mulvihill was told on October 7 2003 that her job could no longer be maintained and she was sent a letter of termination by reason of redundancy. The claimant questioned the redundancy and a new calculation was done to reflect service from 1995 instead of 1998.
The claimant was offered an interview for the position of kitchen assistant in November 2003 but did not attend for interview, the tribunal heard. The claimant had not been notified about the co-ordinator position and would not have been aware that her job was included in the co-ordinator position which had been advertised in the press. The claimant said she would have applied for the co-ordinator position if she had known what was happening and she told the tribunal she did not feel able to take up the position in the kitchen after the way she had been treated.
The tribunal found that a redundancy situation did not exist in the case and found that Ms Mulvihill was dismissed unfairly.
