FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : NATIONWIDE CARGLASS LIMITED TRADING AS MR WINDSCREEN - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Disciplinary procedures.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Complainant has been employed as a Call Centre Administrator / Call Handler Account Manager since September 2007. A difficulty arose during November 2010 regarding "dropped phone calls" which resulted in the Complainant receiving a disciplinary sanction imposed by Management. The Complainant was unhappy that she was not allowed representation at disciplinary meetings and feels that she was not treated in a reasonable and fair manner. The issue was referred to the Rights Commissioner Service but the Employer refused to attend.
On the 12th December, 2011 the Union 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 20th March, 2012.
The Union agreed to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Complainant was refused representation at the disciplinary hearings and she was found guilty without a shred of evidence that she was guilty of any wrongdoings.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company has at all times adhered to its Disciplinary Code of Practice internally, however, as a gesture of goodwill the Final Written Warning of 13th December 2010 was replaced by a "letter of caution" by Management.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has carefully considered the submissions of both parties in this dispute.
The Court recognises the very genuine lengths the Respondent went to in this case in an effort to be fair to the Complainant. However, taking all of the circumstances into account, the Court finds that the decision to issue the Complainant with a final written warning, subsequently reduced to a letter of caution, was not sufficiently well grounded in evidence. The Court accordingly recommends that the letter be withdrawn and the records amended accordingly.
The Court further notes that the Company has, since this incident, taken steps to improve both its technology and management / staff relations processes and procedures to bring them into line with modern best practice standards.
Finally the Court notes that good working relations have been restored between the parties.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
5th June 2012______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.