ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00003854

Complaint(s)/Dispute(s) for Resolution:

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 03/10/2016

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael Hayes

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and the abovementioned Act, following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s). 

Complainant’s Submission and Presentation:

The complainant submits that the respondent failed to pay her entitlement under the critical illness policy (CIP) in a timely manner despite having received the appropriate recommendation from the Occupational Health Physician. This was confirmed at the beginning of May and unilaterally changed without consultation on the basis of a revised decision which was notified to her in early June when she was on sick leave following a major surgery. It delayed her payments under the Temporary Rehabilitation Remuneration Scheme (TRR) leaving her without an income or without explanation. She was obliged to take out a temporary loan by way of bank overdraft and an advancement of monies from the income protection scheme of which she is a member. She received no salary in the month of June. The complainant seeks a compensatory payment of 3 months salary (€10,000) by way of penalisation for maladministration and in consideration of the fact that she had to engage the services of an accountant as a result of the respondent has failed to “communicate decisions to her in an expeditious manner, has back-dated and reversed decisions without communication and has failed to advise her of her right to appeal and has ignored her trade union’s call to hear an appeal of the decision, passing it from one party to another, with nobody taking responsibility for dealing with the issue”. Additionally she seeks the application of TRR for any period that CIP might cease to apply, and award of 2 months salary (€6,500) for financial distress, similar for emotional distress, an apology from the respondent and an independent review in respect of the respondent’s administration of this matter.

Respondent’s Submission and Presentation:

The respondent submits that it has applied the terms of the CIP in accordance with its terms as amended by the Labour Court (LCR 20667) in this case. The initial report of the Occupational Physician (OP) recommended payment of the CIP however following a query the OP noted that the illness did not fall within the qualifying criteria as outlined at 2.1.4.    

The application was subsequently refused and Temporary Rehabilitation Remuneration was paid. The matter was appealed by the complainant’s trade union in her behalf and the decision was reversed. There is no provision for the payment of compensation in the protocol.

Decision:

It is clear that the administrative aspects were deficient from the complainant’s perspective in this case but it is also clear that the delays and alleged administrative failures arose out of an initial failure to thoroughly review the application. I am of the opinion that the respondent made good on the human error aspect precipitating the failure to pay the complainant in June. I am taking the complainant at her word in respect of the engagement of an accountant in the circumstances.

I recommend payment of compensation to the complainant in all the circumstances of €300 (say three hundred euro) net in full and final settlement of all the issues arising in this case.

Dated:   9^th February 2017