FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HSE WEST (REPRESENTED BY HSE WEST) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY CLARKE & FLYNN SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-065202-ir-08/EOS.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the manner in which the HSE investigated a complaint made against the Worker. The Worker claims that manner in which the investigation was carried out was so flawed that its findings should be declared null and void. The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 2nd April, 2009 the Rights Commissioner issued the following Recommendation:-
- “I have concluded that [the Worker's] complaint against her employer is well-founded and accordingly agree with her that the investigation and its findings should be set aside ... I recommend that the HSE pay [the Worker] €3,500 compensation for the distress caused to her arising from the failures of her remployer in their management of the complaints against her”.
- “I have concluded that [the Worker's] complaint against her employer is well-founded and accordingly agree with her that the investigation and its findings should be set aside ... I recommend that the HSE pay [the Worker] €3,500 compensation for the distress caused to her arising from the failures of her remployer in their management of the complaints against her”.
3. 1.The alleged events complained of took place over six years ago.
2.TheHSE has consistently failed to investigate this complaint in a fair and timely manner.
3.This has caused the Worker considerable stress and she should be compensated accordingly.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Any delay in investigating this complaint was not due to inaction on the part of the Employer.
2. The complaint was independently investigated.
3. No disciplinary action was taken against the Worker as a result of the investigation of this complaint.
DECISION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties the court is not satisfied that there were any defects in the investigation process which were so fundamental as to justify setting the findings aside. Accordingly the court does not uphold the Rights Commissioners findings to that effect.
The court is satisfied that there was an inordinate delay in communicating the original complain to the Worker. While that delay did not vitiate the subsequent investigation it was nonetheless objectionable and unfair to Dr Knaf. In these circumstances the Court believes that the compensation awarded by the Rights Commissioner should be upheld.
The Rights Commissioners recommendation is amended accordingly.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
4th March, 2011______________________
JMcCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.