A postman who lost his job for allegedly re-posting mail he was supposed to deliver has failed in an attempt to have the High Court order An Post to reinstate him.
Mr Justice Max Barrett refused Gary Boyle (31) orders for injunctions reinstating him to his old job; compelling An Post to pay his salary pending determination of wrongful dismissal proceedings and a direction preventing An Post from appointing a replacement.
In a reserved judgment, Mr Justice Barrett said that because of the mandatory nature of Mr Boyle’s application the court had to consider if he had shown “at least that he has a strong case that he is likely to succeed at the hearing of the action.”
He said Mr Boyle had failed to establish this and as a result his case fell at the very first hurdle and from that stumble he could not recover.
Judge Barrett said postmen and postwomen were important pillars of community life entrusted with the safe carriage and delivery of all manner of correspondence.
Mr Boyle had, until recently, been a postman in Coolock, Dublin and had been dismissed for alleged “re-posting” of mail.
“In other words An Post has formed the view that instead of delivering certain post that was entrusted to him for safe delivery, Mr Boyle re-posted it in a letter-box close to his home,” the judge said.
An Post had considered Mr Boyle’s misbehaviour to have been so bad as to merit termination of his employment for misconduct. The company had, following an investigation and disciplinary process, paid him all entitlements on the ordinary termination of his contract.
Mr Justice Barrett said Mr Boyle claimed An Post had not adhered to fair procedures and, as a consequence, he had been wrongfully dismissed. An Post had claimed it was a case for the Employment Appeals Tribunal.
He said Mr Boyle had claimed people had been saying possibly untrue things about him and, while doubtlessly unpleasant, today’s news quickly became yesterday’s story.
To grant the injunctions he sought would cause great prejudice to the operation and functioning of An Post’s business in that arrangements had already been made to deal with its workforce requirements following Mr Boyle’s initial suspension and ultimate dismissal.
“It is never nice to believe that one has been wronged and Mr Boyle clearly considers that he has been seriously wronged,” the judge said. “His courage in running the financial risk to which he stands exposed by coming to court is testament to the strength of his conviction in this regard.”
He was not entitled to the injunctive reliefs he sought. The proceedings were adjourned to October.