| -1°C Dublin

Brennans' hotel told to pay €90k over sacking

Close

Hotel boss John Brennan fired the Park’s General Manager

Hotel boss John Brennan fired the Park’s General Manager

Hotel boss John Brennan fired the Park’s General Manager

The Labour Court has recommended that TV's Brennan brothers' five-star Park Hotel in Kenmare, Co Kerry, pays €90,000 to a general manager sacked last April.

The unnamed general manager (GM) took up his post last January but was fired during his probationary period by managing director John Brennan.

He brought an unfair dismissal claim to the Labour Court, and the court has found he was denied natural justice in his dismissal and that procedures adopted in the termination of his employment were seriously flawed.

As a result, the Labour Court has recommended that the Park Hotel pays the claimant €90,000.

However, it is likely that the sacked GM will not receive any monies as a result of his case as the recommendation is not binding on the hotel.

Yesterday, John Brennan, who featured in RTE's At Your Service, said: "We note the findings of the Labour Court recommendation.

"However, they are not binding and employment was terminated within the probationary period."

Mr Brennan said that in their time at the Park Hotel, since 1981, he and his brother Francis "have never had an unfair dismissal case taken against us".

Mr Brennan added that "we have never terminated em- ployment in the probation- ary period before and have a very good working relation- ship with all of our 70 employees".

In the case before the Lab- our Court, the GM said he was "headhunted" by the Park Hotel, that he moved from Dublin to Kenmare to take up the role last January 28 and that he was dismissed without warning by the managing director last April 27.

In response, the Park Hotel disputed the employee had been headhunted, and said the contract of employment unequivocally provides that either party can terminate the contract by giving written notice during the probationary period.

Jeopardy

In its findings, the Labour Court stated there is no reason to doubt the worker's assertion that his reputation was seriously damaged by the actions of his employer.

In its recommendation, it stated it is satisfied that the worker was not provided with details of any performance issues; no warning was given that his employment was in jeopardy; he was not afforded the right to representation; he was not provided with reasons for his dismissal; and he was not afforded an opportunity to reply.


Privacy