A FORMER care worker at a Kilkenny accommodation centre for homeless men has been awarded €22,500 compensation after he resigned following disagreements including a row over a "dry policy" banning drink or drugs.
An Employment Appeals Tribunal found David Ryan, of New Building Lane, Kilkenny, was constructively dismissed by the Good Shepherd Centre in Church Lane where he worked since 1997.
In a determination issued yesterday, the three-member tribunal said it unanimously found it was reasonable for Mr Ryan to leave his job in March 2006.
The centre provides emergency accommodation for up to 53 homeless men. A large percentage are addicted to alcohol and/or drugs.
The board of management had incorporated a dry-house policy and any breach meant eviction. Men could not return to the centre under the influence of alcohol, drugs or solvents.
When he was acting manager in October 2005, Mr Ryan said he had discharged a man from the centre who had returned to the home smelling of alcohol for the third time. He said a council official later told him he was in breach of agreed policy between the centre and the county council, and if the man was not readmitted funding would be stopped and the centre closed.
He readmitted the man under protest. "The impression the claimant was given was that the dry-house rules did not apply anymore," the determination says.
A council witness told the tribunal it was her duty to look after the homeless and ensure they had accommodation overnight. She was "adamant" that she did not instruct Mr Ryan to take in a client when he was drunk, or that there was interference with the day-to-day management of the centre.
The tribunal found that in light of the events following the October 2005 incident it was reasonable for Mr Ryan to understand that the dry-house rules had been changed. This constituted a material change to his terms of employment.
Mr Ryan and his trade union raised his concerns about this with the centre, but it "failed to deal with them in a reasonable or timely manner".
The tribunal also found it was reasonable for Mr Ryan to be concerned that for the first time in his long service with the centre a number of complaints were made against him when he was on holidays. This concern was compounded by the "unfair and unsatisfactory manner" in which the centre dealt with the complaints.