FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : G BRUSS GMBH (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-093204-ir-10/EOS.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the Workers' claim that he was unfairly disciplined and demoted. This dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 21st March, 2011 the Rights Commissioner issued the following Recommendation:-
- "Having reviewed the entire written and oral submissions, I have concluded that the Employer acted reasonably and accordingly I do not uphold this complaint."
On the 27th April, 2011 the Worker 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 23rd May, 2012.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company failed to investigate the allegations made against the Worker in a fair and transparent manner.
2.The Company has replaced the Worker before the conclusion of its investigation into the allegations made against him.
3.The Worker has suffered considerable financial loss.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.The Company fully investigated the serious allegations made against the Worker.
2.The Worker's behaviour meant that his position as Supervisor was clearly untenable.
3.The Company's decision to demote the Worker was proportionate.
DECISION:
This is an appeal by the worker of a Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation which found against his claim that a penalty imposed against him by the Employer was unfair and excessive. The Claimant was demoted from his position as Night Supervisor to Tool Setter grade. The Claimant stated that the demotion resulted in a significant financial loss and he sought compensation for the loss.
Following an investigation into incidents which occurred on the night shift, on 24thFebruary 2010, the Company concluded that it no longer had trust in the Claimant’s ability to manage the night shift and consequently demoted him to a lower grade.
Having considered the submissions of both sides the Court is of the view that as the Claimant was solely in charge at night he had a critical management responsibility to ensure the smooth running of the plant. Instead of diffusing a particularly difficult situation which arose on the night of 24thFebruary 2010, he contributed to it. In such circumstances the Court is of the view that the sanction taken by the Company was reasonable. The Court concurs with the findings of the Rights Commissioner and upholds her Recommendation. Therefore, the Court rejects the appeal.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
9th July, 2012______________________
JMcCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.