FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : AXA ASSISTANCE IRL LTD (REPRESENTED BY ARTHUR COX) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY MANAGEMENT CONSULTANCY SERVICES) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Unfair Disiplinary Action, Excessively Penallised, Unfair Treatment
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns issues of disciplinary action taken by the Company against its worker. It is alleged that a workplace incident took place whereby a text message was sent to the worker's supervisor in error and that a complaint was subsequntly made against the worker. The worker was then subject to the Company's disciplinary procedures which resulted in her not being afforded the right to choose her representative in the process, not being paid her due wage increase and subsequently being denied her annual bonus. The worker is of the view that these penaltis are unfair and excessive and that all monies owed should be paid.
Management's view is that the contents of the text message were offensive to the supervisor and the complaint made was justifed. It contends that the sanction of a verbal warning was warranted in the circumstances and the non payment of the increases due were not a disciplinary sanction as such but were a direct result of the disciplinary process having taken place.
The worker referred the matter to the Labour Court on 17th June, 2009 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place 29th September, 2010.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The worker was working in a stressed environment and was under severe pressure. The unfortunate issue of the misdirected text message could have been more appropriately dealt with in an informal manner. It was not appropriate to take disciplinary action which resulted in clear breaches of the Company's own procedures and a significant financial loss to the worker.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The text message that the worker sent offended the supervisor and he made as complaint as he was entitled to do. The disciplinary sanction of a verbl warning was appropriate in the circumstances. As a result of the verbal warning the worker did not receive the payments due to he which is in keeping with the procedures adapted by the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is clear that in the course of the disciplinary investigation the employer decided that the chosen representative of the Claimant could not continue in that capacity. This deprived the Claimant of her right to representation under the company’s own disciplinary procedure and the Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievances procedures. In the Court’s view this tainted the process with unfairness and rendered the imposition of a disciplinary sanction unfair.
In the circumstances the Court recommends that the verbal warning be expunged from the Claimant’s record and that the bonus and pay increases withheld be paid.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
26th October 2010______________________
AHChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.