Rehab has been ordered to pay €2,500 compensation to a former employee with an intellectual disability who was dismissed after she was found trying to steal money from colleagues at work.
The Workplace Relations Commission ruled that the woman was unfairly dismissed from her role with Rehab Enterprises on a technicality, although it acknowledged that theft was normally an action that would give rise to a dismissal.
The former employee, who had worked with Rehab for over 20 years, accepted that she was wrong to try to steal money from a cloakroom at work and deserved to be sanctioned.
However, the woman, whose name was anonymised, claimed the sanction of dismissal was disproportionate and she should have instead been issued with a final warning.
Rehab Enterprises, the country's largest private employer of people with disabilities, claimed it had followed fair procedures in the decision to dismiss the woman as the matter had been fairly and thoroughly investigated.
It also stated that theft cannot be condoned as an employer must have trust in their staff.
However, WRC adjudication officer, Brian Dalton, said the onus was on an employer in an unfair dismissal claim to show through evidential proof that the decision taken to terminate a contract was fair and reasonable.
Mr Dalton said Rehab had failed to call any witnesses involved in the decision to dismiss the complainant, despite a WRC hearing being specially reconvened for a second day to allow such witnesses to be heard.
While some members of Rehab management had given evidence about the process that had been followed, Mr Dalton said they had not been involved in either the first disciplinary hearing or a subsequent appeal.
The WRC said the process prima facie used by Rehab to dismiss the complainant was fair.
However, Mr Dalton said the failure of the actual decision makers to give evidence that their decision was fair comprised Rehab's case.
"This means technically the decision to dismiss is unfair," he added.
The WRC also heard the woman was deeply unhappy at the time as she had been moved from a centre where she had worked since 1996 to another centre because of the Covid-19 pandemic which was hugely disruptive and destabilising for her.
Her representative, SIPTU shop steward Joseph Ateb, claimed that Rehab had done nothing to return her to her old centre in response to several representations he had made to management about her mental health.
Mr Ateb claimed Rehab had shown no concern about the negative effect of the relocation on the complainant.
In his ruling, Mr Dalton observed that there had been no prior issue with her work in Rehab and he accepted what happened was "clearly out of character".
The WRC also acknowledged that cases of theft would normally result in the dismissal of an employee.
Mr Dalton said the facts showed that the employee in the case before the WRC, who had a disability, had been making representations prior to the incident about how she was not settling in to her new working environment.
However, he said the woman's contribution to her dismissal by attempting to steal from her colleagues would bear on the level of redress.
For that reason, the WRC ruled that reinstatement or reengagement was not an option in the circumstances of the case and only a small level of compensation was merited.
Awarding a sum of €2,500, Mr Dalton remarked: "While the complainant has a disability, she has the moral compass to know what she did was wrong."
"The employee is faced with the fact that she was attempting to steal from colleagues," he added.
