€5,000 Unfair Dismissal Award for Bus Driver

Bus Eireann

2 January 2022

€5,000 compensation for unfair dismissal has been awarded to Kenneth Folman, a former Bus Éireann worker who had been dismissed from his position following being disqualified from driving.

Despite the WRC adjudication officer ruling, on an earlier occasion, that the individual should be reinstated to his role in the aftermath of the unfair dismissal ruling, the Labour Court has returned a ruling that this should not happen and the man should not get his old job back.

The Labour Court was hearing the appeal, submitted by Bus Éireann following the WRC adjudication officer’s ruling. There was no appeal of the WRC ruling of unfair dismissal.

Mr Folman’s Bus Eireann contract was terminated in August 2019. Prior to this he had been employed by the commercial semi-state company on a full-time basis from the time period between June 2018 and August 2019.

Bus Éireann, as part of their defence informed the adjudicator that there had been many problems in relation to Mr Folman’s work performance that resulted in a final written warning in June 2019. It was added that the man had 100% ‘contributed to his own dismissal’.

Bus Eireann informed the WRC hearing that the man was unable to carry out the job he had been hired to carry out as he was involved in a court case where he was disqualified from driving. This, the group felt, left them in no position other than to terminate his contract of employment as the trust between the employee and the company had been damaged beyond repair. They added that they believe Mr Folman had successfully found employment with another company quite quickly. 

Mr Folman informed the WRc hearing that he was of the opinion that the incidents leading to the final written warning from Bus Eireann were as significant as they (Bus Eireann) were stating. As they were found worthy of a final writ he said that he believed that it was not just to depend on them to terminate his contract of employment.

The WRC adjudicator was also informed that Mr Folman successfully appealed his driving disqualification. Mr Folman stated that all new drivers experience significant incidents during this activity but without doing so they would not be able to become better drivers in time.

He was represented by the National Bus and Rail Workers’ Union, which claimed that Bus Eireann had proceeded from a final written warning to outright dismissal without affording Mr Folman the opportunity of having a fair hearing or the chance to appeal the decision.

Mr Folman informed the hearing that he was earning a weekly wage of around €79 less than he had been before he was dismissed from his Bus Eireann role. He 

Deputy chair Louise O’Donnell, as part of her ruling, said: “Safety is Bus Éireann’s first priority. We are satisfied with the outcome of the Labour Court appeal in this case and have no further comment to make.”

Due to this she said that does not believe reinstatement is appropriate but that she felt the compensation was the appropriate form of redress.

Follow us for the latest updates & news

Recent News

Autistic cinema manager wins €12k over discrimination in roster row

An autistic cinema manager who quit when his employer was unable to guarantee him two days off in a row following a months-long dispute over rostering arrangements has secured €12,000 in compensation for disability discrimination. The complainant's wife gave evidence...

Northern Ireland exam board boss wins £100,000 settlement

Northern Ireland’s Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) has paid a substantial settlement to its former interim chief executive who complained of sex, race and age discrimination and constructive dismissal. The sum paid to Margaret Farragher,...

Recent Articles

Psychological Injury

Nervous Shock I The law allows recovery of damages for so called nervous shock, within certain parameters and subject to limitations.  Nervous shock is the most commonly used legal label for psychiatric or psychological injury. Psychiatric injuries include...

Public Authorities and Negligence

Powers and Duties In broad terms, public authorities are subject to civil liability for negligence and other civil wrongs, in the same way as private individuals and companies.  The State and other public bodies are responsible for the actions and omissions of...

Duty of Care (Part 2)

Limits to Neighbour Principle The famous neighbour principle re-stated the general basis of liability in negligence. It stated, that “you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your...

Duty of Care (Part 1)

Meaning of Negligence I Negligence is used in a number of senses.  In one sense, it refers to a person’s state of mind.  An act is negligent, where it is done without giving due weight to the risks involved.  A person  (and his state of mind) may...

Join our Panel

You May Also Like...