FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : CARLOW COLLEGE (REPRESENTED BY MASON HAYES & CURRAN) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY MR TIERNAN LOWEY B.L., INSTRUCTED BY AUGUSTUS CULLEN LAW, SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Ongoing grievances.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case concerns a claim of ongoing grievances. These grievances were the subject of a Labour Court hearing on the 15thJanuary 2013 and the Court issued LCR 20453 to deal with the matters.
- The Claimant stated that the majority of his grievances have never been addressed by the Respondent and remain outstanding.
The Employer said that the Claimant had complained specifically in relation to bullying and harassment which had been investigated by a Senior Counsel. The Claimant appealed this finding and a Consultant found the findings to be reasonable and sound in all the circumstances.
On the 3rd March the Worker referred the 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 8thSeptember 2015.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court notes that the matter before the Court brought under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 concerns issues of contention between the parties which have been ongoing for a number of years. An independent investigation has been conducted which was subsequently the subject of an appeal. However, the Claimant contends that there are still issues in contention which have not been the subject of any investigation and remain unresolved.
The Court is of the view that a further investigation would serve no practical purpose other than prolonging the situation. Both the Claimant and Management made it clear to the Court that they are anxious to resume good working relations and are willing to enter into a facilitated process to bring final resolution to the issues. The Court is of the view that such a process is the most appropriate means to bring final resolution to the issues in contention to the mutual satisfaction of both sides.
Having considered the positions of both sides the Court recommends that an independent person (nominated by the Court) should in consultation and with the full co-operation of both parties conduct such a facilitated process. For the avoidance of any doubt the Court is not recommending a new investigation into the allegations made. The Court is recommending a means to move forward and not look back.
On receipt of confirmation of acceptance of the Recommendation by both parties the Court will make the above-mentioned nomination.
The Court so Recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
CR______________________
22nd September, 2015.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.