A PSYCHOLOGIST, Dr Paul O'Mahony, has lost his appeal against dismissal by Trinity College at the Employment Appeals Tribunal.
But the tribunal has added a rider to its determination, suggesting that the Dublin university consider rehiring Dr O'Mahony.
The main reason his three year contract at Trinity was not renewed was that the college employment policy changed while he was working there, according to the tribunal.
Dr O'Mahony was working for the Department of Justice when he responded to a newspaper advertisement in 1991 seeking a full time lecturer in psychology for the TCD school of occupational therapy.
The advertisement said the posit ion would be "tenable for an initial period of three years".
Before Dr O'Mahony's interview for the job, the college sent him documents setting out the conditions of employment, which appeared to relate to a permanent post.
At the interview he was told that all that was on offer was a three year, fixed term contract, although it was possible the contract would be renewed or the job made permanent after three years.
Dr O'Mahony signed the contract.
In mid 1994 the college authorities decided that he would not be re employed beyond the end of the year, and he was sent a redundancy payment.
In his evidence to the tribunal Dr O'Mahony said that academic
"We reject, in particular, crude, simplistic measures of school effectiveness."
Dr O'Mahony also produced evidence that during the three year period of the contract, the college had changed its employment policy.
Previously, fixed term contracts had been renewed, but after a change in unfair dismissals legislation in 1993, TCD decided that contract appointments would not be renewed and that this should be made clear to candidates.
Trinity's evidence was that Dr O'Mahony had signed the three year contract, and had never been told that the job would continue beyond that term.
The tribunal found that, while Dr O'Mahony might have hoped or expected that the job would continue beyond three years, he fully understood when signing the contract that he was being offered only a three year term.
However, the tribunal also took into account the way the job had been advertised, the documents Dr O'Mahony was sent before the interview, and the change in college employment policy while he was there.
It said Dr O'Mahony was "an ironic victim of a change in the law, which was designed to improve the position of employees on fixed term contracts".
The tribunal said that, while the appeal had failed, "given the special circumstances of this case . . . we consider ourselves entitled to add to our determination a rider that the respondents [Trinity] consider whether they might re engage the claimant on agreed terms."