FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : G4S SUPPORT SERVICES (IRELAND) LTD - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner Recommendation No r-108506-ir-11/EH
BACKGROUND:
2. This case is an appeal by the worker of Rights Commissioner Recommendation No r-108506-ir-11/EH. The issue concerns two incidences of alleged inappropriate treatment and threats from one worker towards another. The incidences resulted in an investigation by management and the worker was disciplined with a final written warning.
The issue was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation. His Recommendation issued on the 28th September, 2011 as follows:
" I recommend that the worker should accept that the incidents did occur and that the employer was obliged to take certain actions to protect their employees.
I recommend that the final written warning should be downgraded to a written warning and should now be treated as expired.
I recommend that this matter is now closed."
The worker was named in the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation.
On the 4th November 20111, the worker appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 4th January 2012.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The alleged incidents and complaints that were submitted did not occur as outlined by the complainant. The Claimant in this case was unable to disprove the accusations as she did not have any witnesses.
2 The worker has never had any previous difficulties in the workplace and there were no other complaints made before or since these alleged incidents.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 A complaint was made against the worker by her colleague. The final written warning was given on the basis of how the worker reacted and the language she used when approached in relation to the initial incident.
2 There were members of management present at the second incident where the inappropriate language and threatening behaviour was used. Management are satisfied that the incident that gave rise to the final written warning did occur as reported.
DECISION:
The Court has carefully considered the submissions of both parties in this case.
In all the circumstances of this case the Court rejects the appeal and upholds the Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner. In doing so the Court notes that the matter has had no long term or lasting adverse effect on either working relationships or arrangements for the parties concerned.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
3rd February 2012______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.