FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : MEATH COUNTY COUNCIL (REPRESENTED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES BOARD) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Appeal of a Rights Commissioner's Recommendation R-080030-IR-09/JW.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker concerned has been employed by Meath County Council as a labourer since 10th May, 2004.
On 17th August, 2006 and on the 25th September, 2007 disciplinary meetings took place with the Worker and a Verbal Warning was issued on both occasions. Following a further disciplinary meeting in October, 2007 a Written Warning was issued.
Another disciplinary meeting was held with the Worker in January, 2008 and a Final Written Warning issued as a result. The Worker appealed this warning and a hearing was arranged for the 28th February, 2008. In the interim an incident of Gross Misconduct occurred and the Worker was suspended on full pay pending an investigation.
At the appeal hearing the Union, on behalf of the Worker, advised that it would not appeal the Final Written Warning.
Following the investigation of the incident of Gross Misconduct a meeting was held with the Worker and the options available were explained to him. A letter was issued to the Worker in April ,2008 advising him that the disciplinary process was suspended subject to certain conditions.
Several more incidents occurred and on 17th February 2009 a disciplinary meeting took place and a further Final Written Warning and Notice of Suspension issued on 6th March, 2009. The Worker was suspended for 3 months without pay. The severity of the suspension was appealed and the suspension was amended to 2 months without pay and 1 month with pay.
The Union, on behalf of the Worker, appealed the sanction to the Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. The Rights Commissioner issued his Recommendation on the 11th February, 2010 as follows:-
"......... the claimant was issued with both a final written warning and notice of suspension in relation to 2 instances of lateness. The procedures do not allow for both sanction to be issued at the same time.
I find that the complaint is well founded in part. I recommend that the employer rescind the sanction of suspension but uphold the sanction of final written warning."
On 17th February, 2010 Meath County Council 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 7th July, 2010, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Council held disciplinary meetings with the Worker on several occasions relating to incidents following his failure to follow proper procedures as laid down by the Council. Numerous warnings were issued, howeve, there was no improvement in his behaviour.
2. The Council maintains that paragraph 4:8 of its procedures allows for appropriate action to be taken where after a final written warning has been issued there are further breaches of discipline. Furthermore the procedure provides for a period of suspension without pay where a staff member is in breach of his/her employment contract amounting to misconduct (para 5:1 refers).
3. The Council submits that it has acted fairly and reasonably taking all aspects of this case into account. The sanction imposed was warranted given the ongoing and persistent breach of discipline.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Union contends that the Council breached the Disciplinary Procedure by moving to suspension before it had carried out a full investigation of all the circumstances of the case.
2. The Union maintains that the Rights Commisioner in his finding agreed that the procedures do not allow for both a final written warning and suspension to be issued at the same time.
3. The Union contends that the Council imposed the suspension prematurely and that the 3 months (2 months unpaid suspension) was 'over the top' and would normally be imposed for gross misconduct to avoid a dismissal and not for 2 lates which its member is not disputing.
.
DECISION:
The Court has carefully considered the submissions of both parties to this dispute.
The Court rejects the appeal and upholds the Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
9th July, 2010______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.