FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : CASTLETHORN CONSTRUCTION LTD (REPRESENTED BY CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY FEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Appeal of a Recommendation of a Rights Commissioner No. R-080283-IR-09/JT.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker concerned commenced employment with the Company in September 1990. He worked with the Company for eighteen years until his employment was terminated by virtue of redundancy in 2008. The Worker had requested to be made redundant due to his wife's illness.
In the summer of 2008 the Worker made several complaints to the Company alleging bullying and harassment by a number of employees. An informal meeting took place but the Worker felt that he did not receive a fair hearing at that meeting and that he could not proceed to deal with the issues formally while still an employee of the Company.
Following the cessation of his employment he referred his difficulty to the Rights Commissioner Service for investigation and recommendation. The Rights Commissioner issued his Recommendation on the 19th April 2010 as follows:-
"I have considered the submissions and arguments put forward by both parties. The claimant has not substantiated the complaint in regard to any harassment that he believes took place. Furthermore there was an informal meeting with regard to the original complaint made by the claimant, he declined to make a formal complaint. Therefore the respondent's have no case to answer for therefore I do not find the claim well founded and therefore it falls."
On the 17th May 2010, the Claimant 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 17th August, 2010.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union, on behalf of the Worker, maintains that the Company failed the Worker during his last years of employment as they failed to recognise the pressure he was being put under by certain workers.
2. The Union maintains that the meeting with the Worker was informal and that therefore there are no records to substantiate what was said or of what happened at that meeting. The Worker was deeply hurt by remarks made at that meeting and is seeking an apology for the hurt caused.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company maintains that the Worker made a complaint about bullying and harassment. The Company advised him of the procedure for dealing with such complaints and issued him with the Company's policy on Dignity and Respect in the Workplace. The Worker sought to resolve the issues informally and declined to go down the formal route.
2. The Company apologised to the Worker during the course of the hearing for any hurt it may have caused. No hurt was ever intended.
DECISION:
The Claimant is seeking an admission that he was unfairly treated and harassed during the currency of his employment with the Company and an apology for same. The Company have no recollection of any of the events to which the Claimant relies in making his complaint. Nevertheless, in the course of the hearing a representative of the Company told the Court that it always regarded the Claimant as a valued employee, and if he had suffered any distress or hurt in the course of his employment, it apologised.
It is clear to the Court that the Claimant retired from his employment with the Company on amicable terms and that the Company had facilitated him in acceding to his request for voluntary redundancy within weeks of his normal retirement date. The Court notes the apology proffered by the representative of the Company at the hearing which the Court regards as magnanimous and sincere.
The Court recommends that this apology be accepted in the spirit in which it is offered and that the matter be finally resolved on that basis.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
20th August, 2010______________________
Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.