FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HEALTH SERVICE EXECUTIVE SOUTH - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY OISIN SCOLARD, B.L. INSTRUCTED BY JAMES V WALSH & SONS SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. 1. Refusal by Management to resolve long standing grievance. 2. Lack of transparency regarding the filling of position of Director of Public Health Nursing in an acting capacity.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Complainant is employed as an Assistant Director of Public Health Nursing (APHN) North Lee, Cork since September 2005. The issues before the Court involve a number of HSE Organisational Human Resources Policies namely Dignity at Work and Grievance Procedures..
On the 8th December, 2010 the Worker referred the issue to the Labour Court, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 12th October, 2011.
The Worker agreed to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Management has failed to follow their own code of practice, published by the Commission for Public Service Appointments, regarding the fair execution of its investigation into the issues of this case.
2.The results of this investigation should be set aside.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The HSE South is satisfied that it has given full regard for HSE policies and procedures in the management of the Complainant's concerns. Full engagement has taken place with the Complainant and her representatives regarding the Grievance and Dignity at Work procedures
2. The necessary arrangements to provide the Complainant with a copy of interview transcripts and an opportunity to meet with the Investigation Team, are all in place. All that is required to bring these matters to a conclusion is the cooperation of the Complainant.
RECOMMENDATION:
The HSE has received a complaint under its dignity of work policy directed against the Claimant. The HSE has an obligation to investigation that complaint and the Claimant has a concomitant obligation to cooperate with that investigation.
It seems clear that there has been an inordinate delay in bringing this investigation to finality. However, it seems that the Claimant herself was in large measure responsible for the delay. The process is being conducted by an independent tribunal and any complaints in relation to the manner in which the investigation is conducted should be addressed to the investigatiors. It is also noted that the procedure allows an avenue of appeal. Should either party be dissatisfied with the outcome of the investigation, including the manner in which the investigation was conducted, the appeal stage can be utilised to ventilate this dissatisfaction.
The Court notes that the investigation is likely to conclude in a matter of weeks. The Court recommends that all parties cooperate with the investigation team so as to ensure that this deadline is met.
With regard to the grievance issue and the filling of acting posts, it is noted that these matters are the subject of an industrial relation process. The Court recommends that process be allowed to continue to finality.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
4th November, 2011______________________
JFChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.