FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : TRINITY BIOTECH MANUFACTURING LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's recommendation IR6870/01/JH.
BACKGROUND:
2. The appeal concerns a worker who was employed by the Company from January, 2000 until December, 2001. She commenced employment as a Buyer and in October, 2000 she was promoted to the position of Purchasing Manager. The worker claimed that she was subjected to bullying and intimidation by her immediate manager (the Operations Director) and was forced to resign from the employment because of her treatment. Management rejected the claim stating that she resigned from the employment of her own volition. The dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation. On the 15th September, 2003 the Rights Commissioner issued her recommendation as follows:
"As stated earlier, it is not possible at this stage to conduct an investigation of the allegations of bullying and harassment made by the worker. However, based on all of the evidence available it is reasonable to conclude a combination of factors around her employment in Trinity Biotech forced her to resign from the Company at significant financial loss to her and causing her considerable loss and upset. In all of the circumstances I recommend that Trinity Biotech pay the worker the sum of €10,000 net in full and final settlement of her dispute".
(The worker was named in the Rights Commissioner's recommendation).
On the 21st October, 2003 the Company appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court. The Court heard the appeal on the 16th January, 2004.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The claimant was not dismissed, she resigned from the employment.
2. The claimant, on promotion to the post of Purchasing Manager, had experienced difficulties in coping with her new position and her immediate manager was forced to undertake some of the claimant's responsibilities and restructure the area by bringing in a more senior person (to whom the claimant would report) as well as appointing an additional buyer.
3. Despite her qualifications and experience the claimant did not utilise the grievance procedure to process her complaint. She ignored this important part of her contract and submitted her resignation without discussion or consultation.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker was subjected to constant bullying and harassment by her immediate manager over a period of eighteen months (details supplied to the Court).
2. The claimant did try to discuss her complaint with her immediate manager and another senior manager without success. She ultimately wrote to the CEO of the Company outlining her grievance in significant detail, to no avail.
3. The claimant enjoyed her job and had an excellent working relationship with colleagues. She had a proven track record in Trinity Biotech and other employments.
4. Because of the claimant's treatment and having her complaints ignored she was left with no option but to resign from the employment.
DECISION:
The Court has considered the oral and written submissions of the parties. The Company appealed the Rights Commissioner's recommendation as the claimant had taken the decision to resign without referring her allegation of bullying through the grievance procedures.
The Court is of the view that the Company made no effort to deal with difficulties raised by the employee during the period of her employment and no effort was made to investigate the serious allegations of bullying formally made at the time of her resignation. The Court is critical of the Company's failure to recognise and exercise their duty of care to the employee. Therefore, the Court rejects the Company's appeal and, in all the circumstances of this case, recommends that the redress awarded should be increased to €35,000.
The appeal fails.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
22nd January, 2004______________________
TODDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.