FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 28(1), ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT, 1997 PARTIES : HSE - AND - TOM WHELEHAN DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Appealing against a Rights Commissioner's Decision R-051276-Ir-07-SR
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns an appeal by the worker of Rights Commissioners Decision R-051276-Ir-07-SR. The issue in dispute concerns the worker's clock card and his claim that it was defaced by management after a question mark was placed on it in relation to his time of leaving on Thursday 11th April, 2002. The worker claims that he keyed out of work on the day in question and attended a medical appointment. It is also his position that he notified his Supervisor in relation to his appointment on the day.
He claims the defacement of his clock card was an attempt by management to question his honsety and integrity on the basis of other workplace issues that he had previously brought to their attention.
Management contends that it had not, at any time, deliberately altered the worker's clock card and had not made any attempts at deception in relation to the workers previous employment with them. It also claimed that all issues between managment and the worker had been concluded as part of a previous mediated settlement.
The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation. His decision issued on the 16th January 2008 and did not find in favour of the worker's claim.
On the 20th February 2008, the worker appealed the Rights Commissioner's Decision in accordance with Section 28(1) of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997. A Labour Court hearing took place 11th June, 2008.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The Clock Cards were deliberately interfered with by management. The worker had to attend a medical appointment on the day in question and advised his supervisor of this prior to leaving work on the day.
2 Management's actions in relation to the Clock Card are a serious attempt to discredit the workers honesty and integrity. This is unacceptable and at variance with the terms of the contract of employment.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 Management did not attempt to question the workers honesty in relation to the day in question, nor has it attempted any deception in relation to his previous employment with them.
2 A previous mediated settlement dealt with all matters in relation to the worker's employment and previous issues that were raised with management.
DETERMINATION:
The Court, having considered the submissions made by the parties, can find no reason to alter the Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner and decides accordingly to uphold it.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
11th July 2008______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.