FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : BON SECOURS HOSPITAL - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal of investigation of bullying and harassment
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union's case concerns an appeal of an investigation into allegations of bullying and harrassment of the worker. The worker had previously referred her case to the Labour Court and LCR18193 issued on the 12th of May, 2005. The Court recommends that Mr. Tom Wall be appointed as an independent investigator. Mr. Wall issued his report on the 30th of May, 2005. The worker believed that Mr. Wall failed to apply the definition of the Code of Practice S.I.17 of 2002 in his investigation. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 11th of July, 2006, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, in Killarney. The worker agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION:
The case before the Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, refers to an appeal of investigation carried out by Mr. Tom Wall into allegations of Bullying and Harassment against the Hospital. The Union now seeks an investigation by a Rights Commissioner into the worker’s complaints. The grounds of appeal outlined to the Court held that the investigator’s report was not in compliance with the Code of Practice S.I. 17 of 2002 “Procedures for Addressing Bullying in the Workplace”.
This case has been the subject of a previous referral to the Court under Section 20(1) of the 1969 Act whereby the Court nominated Mr. Tom Wall as the independent investigator to investigate the worker’s complaint.
Mr. Wall completed his investigation and issued his report dated 30th May 2005.
The Hospital informed the Court that its procedures on dealing with allegations of Bullying and Harassment provided for a referral to a Rights Commissioner, however, the Union on behalf of the worker declined to avail of the Hospital’s complaint procedures and proceeded to refer her case to the State’s industrial relations machinery in the first instance.
This Court notes that the worker declined to avail of the option of an investigation by a Rights Commissioner under the Hospital’s procedures and instead referred her case to the Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. Furthermore, the Court notes that Recommendation No: LRC 18193 nominated an independent investigator (Mr. Tom Wall) to carry out an investigation into the worker’s complaints and by letter dated 15th July, 2006, to the parties stated:
- “The Court has now finally discharged its functions in respect of the original hearing, and will not be issuing any further recommendation.”
Having reviewed Mr. Wall’s report, this Court is satisfied that a thorough and fair investigation was carried out into all aspects of the complaints made. The Court sees no justifiable reasons to disregard the findings contained in his report and to nominate a further investigator to examine the complaints made. Accordingly, under the circumstances, the Court has no further role to play in this case and recommends that both parties accept the findings and conclusions of Mr. Tom Wall’s report.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
30th November, 2006______________________
CON/MCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.