An investment manager claiming unfair dismissal from his job with Goodbody Stockbrokers was fully entitled to the €50,000 bonus he received a day before he left the company, a Dublin employment tribunal heard yesterday.
At the last meeting of the tribunal in November, Goodbody counsel Seamus Clarke alleged that John Looby had timed his departure to avail of the bonus. Mr Looby claimed he had been entitled to the award since July following the successful launch of one of the funds he had been hired to set up. He handed in his resignation in August.
Mr Looby (36), who along with two others was hired by Goodbody to run an elite high-risk hedge fund management project in August 2003, is claiming the behaviour of one of his colleagues, Michael O'Sullivan, forced him to quit his €124,000-a-year job.
Goodbody, which is owned by AIB and is Ireland's oldest broker, is contesting the case and claims Mr Looby resigned of his own free will.
Under questioning yesterday, Sarah Downing, director of human resources (HR) at Goodbody, said that under the terms of his contract Mr Looby was fully entitled to the bonus at that time.
Addressing the tribunal, Ms Downing outlined what she described as other "highly unusual" payments Mr Looby received as part of his departure package.
In September, he was paid €61,500, comprising his monthly pay and the €50,000 bonus, while in October he received €45,000, which included 13 days' holiday pay and an extra three months' pay as requested by Mr Looby in a meeting with his boss Roy Barret.
The tribunal heard how she had been told by Mr Barret that he had asked for three months' extra pay as a form of compensation for the improper way in which he believed he had been treated at the company.
When probed by Dymphna Cusack, chairwoman of the tribunal, Ms Downing acknowledged that the size of the payout was indeed "exceptionally unusual" for someone who had simply resigned from the company but said even in her HR capacity it hadn't rung any alarm bells that something was not right.
Under cross examination by Mr Looby's counsel, Ms Downing said she wasn't aware of any personal issues that had prompted Mr Looby's resignation until a meeting in October to arrange his final settlement. She added that at this point she believed it to be a personal matter between friends, but did as she parted with Mr Looby recommend he come into the office to discuss the issue with her and Mr Barret. Mr Looby never contacted her.
The counsel for Mr Looby alleged that Goodbody's HR department didn't act in the appropriate manner once it was aware there was an issue. This was denied by Ms Downing.
Also at yesterday's hearing, Brian Gray, the third partner in the project, resumed giving his evidence, describing how after Mr Looby had told him of his alleged problem he had tried his best to resolve the situation by getting the two men to meet and discuss the issue.
He told the tribunal that he had met with Mr Looby himself and tried to remind him that while Mr O'Sullivan was a very forthright individual, he was not the sort to have any sort of agenda. He then asked Mr O'Sullivan to contact Mr Looby to arrange a meeting, which he did.
The case was adjourned to continue next month.
