FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 43(2); INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT; 1990 PARTIES : EIRCOM LIMITED - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Alleged breach of Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker has been employed by Eircom for 30 years. In 2005 the Worker was serving in the position of Customer Team Manager (CTM). As part of restructuring the Worker was asked to take on an extra team member. He refused to do this despite several options being put to him and was advised by the Company that suspension was being considered. The Worker then requested to revert to his previous position of Customer Team Leader (CTL). The Company granted his request and made it clear to him that he was doing it voluntarily and at his own request. The Worker subsequently requested to be reinstated as CTM. His request was refused. This matter is the subject of a claim to the High Court.
A raft of grievance and bullying allegations has emanated from this main grievance and the case before the Court is concerned with the handling of these complaints. The Worker alleges that the Company has breached the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures (S.I. 146 of 2000) in dealing with his grievances. The Company denies the allegations.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 19th February, 2007, which was asked to carry out an investigation into an alleged breach by the Company of the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures (S.I. 146 of 2000). A Labour Court hearing pursuant to Section 43(2) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990 was held on the 1st June, 2007.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The Worker contends that the Company has breached the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures with particular reference to Section 3 - Importance of Procedures and Section 4- General Principles. He further alleges that the alleged breach constitutes bias against him.
2. The Worker also contends thathe was not afforded fair procedures and due process by reference to the Company's failure to adhere to the aforementioned Code of Practice.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.The Company asserts in the strongest terms that it has acted in accordance with the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures and that there is no breach of the Code.
2. The Company maintains that it has made all reasonable efforts to have the Worker's issues addressedand is therefore not in breach of the Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has carefully considered the considerable amount of written and oral material placed before it by the parties to this dispute.
The case was referred to the Court under Section 43(2) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990, claiming a breach by the Company of the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures, S.I. No 146/2000.
Having studied the case and the Code, the Court cannot find that there has been any breach of the Code by the Company, and so recommends.
This, however, hardly advances the resolution of a dispute which has become, with time, all the more complex and difficult to resolve.
In the interests both of good industrial relations and the re-establishment of workplace harmony, the Court would urge both parties to agree to place all the issues between them, including actions in any other forum, legal or otherwise, before an agreed independent mediator with a view to reaching an overall resolution of the issues between Eircom and this employee. This should be done as soon as possible. If the parties cannot agree on an independent mediator, they can request the Court to nominate a person or persons for such an appointment.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
18th June, 2007______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.