Media Lab director loses unfair dismissal claim

A director of corporate relations who was paid a salary of €160,000 by the now defunct Media Lab Europe project has lost a claim…

A director of corporate relations who was paid a salary of €160,000 by the now defunct Media Lab Europe project has lost a claim for unfair dismissal.

The Media Lab high-tech think-tank was set up six years ago as a Government flagship development, with the State investing €35.5 million as part of a deal with Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The joint venture operation in Dublin's Digital Hub went into liquidation last year when the Government refused to bail it out with another €9 million in funding because it did not believe there was a sustainable business plan.

In a determination yesterday, the Employment Appeals Tribunal said it did not have the jurisdiction to deal with the claim by Ronan Smith, Grangemore, Brannockstown, Naas, Co Kildare.

READ MORE

He told the tribunal he became Media Lab's director of corporate relations under a two-year contract in May 2002.

He received a salary of €140,000 plus commission. His duties including hiring staff and attending meetings where issues of funding, salaries and overheads were discussed.

In addition to Government cash, corporate sponsors were needed to maintain the project, which employed about 50, most of them research scientists.

In April 2003 Mr Smith resigned as a full-time employee but continued working for Media Lab under a consultancy agreement. He had a salary of €160,000, which included a payment to cover incidental benefits he had previously received.

Mr Smith maintained that he had remained working for the project with the same duties and responsibilities.

A board meeting in January 2004 decided his consultancy agreement would not be renewed "as the cost of operations was unsustainable". He was dismissed on May 7th.

In its determination yesterday, the tribunal described Mr Smith as a "well-educated and experienced individual" who had freely entered into a contract which had terminated his employment.

As a result, he was no longer a "de facto employee" and this meant the tribunal had no jurisdiction to deal with his claim.