A Thai restaurant has been ordered to pay €32,550 (£28,429) in compensation to a chef who was dismissed after serving food that had fallen on the floor to a customer. The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) ruled that Ecoco Asian Kitchen, which runs outlets in Cornelscourt, Dublin and Bray, Co Wicklow, had wrongfully sacked chef Tommy Chee King Eng.
The WRC heard that Mr Eng had been employed by the company for more than 10 years before being dismissed on 25 June 2025, following allegations of food safety and hygiene violations. He claimed he was dismissed for picking up food from the floor, which he subsequently cooked and served to a customer, as well as for using an incorrect technique when preparing roast duck.
Mr Eng told the WRC that he walked out of a disciplinary hearing when he was confronted with fresh allegations based on CCTV footage. These related to claims that he was touching his head while cooking, failing to wear headwear, and using a mobile phone while preparing food. The chef maintained he felt singled out, as other members of staff had engaged in similar behaviour without facing any disciplinary proceedings.
A spokesperson for Ecoco Asian Kitchen said serious hygiene and food safety concerns had emerged in June 2025, shortly after the company had taken over running the restaurant. The firm stated it had suspended the chef on grounds of potential gross misconduct and subsequently dismissed him based on his written submissions. It maintained it had adhered to fair procedures proportionate to a small employer.
However, WRC adjudication officer Breiffni O'Neill said the company's 'reactive, backward-looking approach' was at odds with what would ordinarily be expected of a new owner inheriting a long-serving employee accustomed to existing practices. He noted that the chef's explanations, including that the dropped food had been re-fried before being served, were not examined in a structured manner and the company had failed to provide any written communication of revised expectations.
Mr O'Neill argued the allegations 'at their height' fell considerably short of the kind of serious and deliberate misconduct capable of justifying dismissal, 'let alone summary dismissal.' He added that the procedures carried out by the company had progressed 'at remarkable speed' and that conducting the disciplinary hearing in a customer area and a cramped storeroom fell short of fair procedure. The WRC also criticised the company for instructing Mr Eng not to discuss the matter with colleagues without prior written authorisation, which contradicted being told he could bring a colleague to the hearing.
