LCR20607

SUBJECT:
1. Claim for reimbursement of medical expenses and alleged breach of grievance procedure.


BACKGROUND:

2. The Claimant is a Social Worker working in Child Protection. Following a number of incidents his stress level increased and he attended a Psychologist. Following further incidents his anxieties worsened and on the recommendation of his G.P he agreed to attend a Psychiatrist.

The Employer said at the commencement of employment staff are advised that they can raise an issue of concern in relation to the workplace through an informal as well as the formal mechanisms of the HSE. The Claimant availed of private practitioners.

On the 16^thApril 2013 the Worker referred his dispute to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.

A Labour Court hearing took place on the 12^thSeptember 2013.

WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1. In April 2010 the Claimant encountered a number of serious difficult work related problems which affected him to an extent that he was required to seek medical treatment.

2. Two month later he suffered his first ever panic attack while given evidence in Court and his direct Line Manager had to step in for him. He was not offered any support or intervention at that time.

• 3. In June 2011 the Claimant told his Line Manager that he was seeing a Psychiatrist for work-related post-traumatic stress disorder. On the 7^thFebruary 2012 IMPACT wrote to the HSE outlining the basis of the claim for reimbursement of medical expenses. It took eight months to schedule a meeting.

EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The Social Work Registration Board requires a Social Worker to take action if health issues are harming their fitness to practise and requires the Social Worker to raise concerns with the appropriate authority.

2. The Claimant is directly supported by a Department Line Management structure – Principal Social Worker, Team Leaders, Social Workers. As part of the workings of the multidisciplinary team, meetings are arranged aside from case conferencing to review progress at individual case level.

3. In late 2011 local Management were advised by the Claimant that he attended psychological and medical services privately. At that time the reimbursement of private medical expenses was formally requested of Management. It is the position of Management that refund of expenditure is only available for those costs incurred in respect of such treatment provided by the Irish Public Health Services.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Union on behalf of an employee submitted a number of issues before the Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, namely: (i) a claim for re-imbursement of medical expenses for work related post-traumatic stress disorder; (ii) time back for attending medical appointments during working hours; and (iii) a complaint that the employer was in breach of the agreed grievance procedures.

Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court notes that the employer provides for refund of expenditure incurred in respect of treatment provided by the Irish Public Health Services where an employee is referred through the HSE Occupational Health Service or the HSE Employee Assistance Programme. However, in this case the Claimant did not avail of either of these Services and proceeded to avail of private medical treatment and consequently his expenses were not reimbursed by the employer.

The HSE stated that normally every effort is made to facilitate rosters to allow employees, not absent on sick leave, to attend medical appointments, however, this cannot always be facilitated and employees are obliged to avail of annual leave or “time-off-in-lieu”.

In all the circumstances, the Court does not see any reason for departing from the well-established practices and procedures operating in the HSE and accordingly does not recommend in favour of the Claimant’s claims for reimbursement of medical expenses or time-back for attendance at medical appointments.

The Court is satisfied that there were delays in processing his grievance and, given the seriousness of the incidents and his reaction to them, the Court is of the view that the Claimant should be compensated for the undue delays in processing his grievance and accordingly recommends that he should be paid a sum of €2,500 in full and final settlement of his claim in that regard before the Court.

The Court so recommends.



Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Caroline Jenkinson
CR______________________
25th September, 2013.Deputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.