FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : MARKS AND SPENCER (REPRESENTED BY SANDRA FAGAN) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal of a Rights Commissioner's Recommendation R-052398-Ir-07/Eh
BACKGROUND:
2. The Claimant is employed as an Operations Adviser at the Company's Grafton Street store where he has worked since 1987. A number of allegations of intimidation, harassment and bullying by colleagues were reported to the Company by the Claimant and after these allegations were made formally to the Company a number of investigations took place and the findings released to the parties concerned but without reaching a conclusion.
The issue involves a claim by an Employee. The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 15th January, 2008, the Rights Commissioner issued his Recommendation as follows:
"Having reflected carefully on this lengthy matter I recommend that the Claimant accepts that both the Company and his Union have done everything possible to resolve these issues.
I recommend that the Claimant accepts the efforts to resolve these matters have been exhausted.
I recommend that the Claimant should accept these outcomes and move on with his career and that he does not raise any issues that occurred prior to this hearing again.
I recommend that the offer of transfer to another store be made available to the Claimant again with no pre-conditions on either side.
I recommend that the Claimant be paid €550 in respect of Doctor's bill, pharmacy bill and Physio bill".
(The Claimant was named in the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation)
- On the 31st January, 2008 the Worker appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 24th April, 2008
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
2. The detrimental effect of working in such a stressful environment has caused the Worker to seek medical help and to avail of sick leave, thus causing him to suffer a financial loss.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Worker has been at the centre of allegations of harassment since 2001 and the Company has investigated the incidents and issued recommendations.
2. The Company has offered the Worker the option of transferring to the Mary Street store and payment of the sum of €550 towards the cost of medical expenses incurred.
DECISION:
The claim before the Court concerns an appeal by the worker of a Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation who recommended that to the employer should, for the second time, offer him a transfer to another store, however, this time with there should be no preconditions on either side. In addition, Rights Commissioner recommended that the employer should pay the sum of €550 for certain medical bills. The Rights Commissioner stated in his recommendation that the worker should accept that all efforts had been made to resolve the matters which gave rise to the difficulties between the parties, and recommended that the worker should move on with his career and not raise the issue again.
Having given careful consideration to the extensive written submissions and all the oral presentations made at the hearing, the Court wholly concurs with the findings and recommendation of the Rights Commissioner and upholds his recommendation.
Therefore, the appeal fails.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
19th May, 2008______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.