Park Hotel told to pay sacked general manager €90k

By Gordon Deegan

The Labour Court has recommended that the Brennan brothers’ five-star Park Hotel in Kenmare, Co Kerry, pay €90,000 to a general manager sacked in April.

The Labour Court has recommended that the Brennan brothers’ five-star Park Hotel in Kenmare, Co Kerry, pay €90,000 to a general manager sacked in April.

The unnamed GM took up his post in January this year but was fired by managing director John Brennan in April during the GM’s probationary period.

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

It recommended the Park Hotel pay the claimant €90,000 in full and final settlement of his claim.

However, it is likely the sacked GM will not receive any monies as the recommendation is not binding on the Park Hotel.

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

He said that during his time at the Park Hotel, “we have never terminated employment in the probationary period before” and “have a very good working relationship with all of our 70 employees”.

The GM said he was headhunted by the Park Hotel; moved from Dublin to Kenmare to take up the role on January 28, 2018; and was dismissed without warning by the managing director on April 27, 2018.

The Park Hotel disputed that the employee had been head-hunted and argued that the MD was entitled to dismiss the GM and that the contract of employment unequivocally provides that either party can terminate the contract by giving written notice during the probationary period.

The GM claimed he was dismissed without warning when the MD called him to a meeting and informed him that “this was not working out” and asked him to leave with immediate effect.

The Labour Court said there was no reason to doubt the worker’s badertion that his reputation was seriously damaged by the actions of his employer.

It said it was satisfied the worker was not provided with details of 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.

It concluded: “Therefore, the court is satisfied that he was denied natural justice.”