ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00005505
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | ADMINISTRATOR | HEALTH PROVIDER |
Dispute:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00007558-001 | 12/10/2016 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 22/06/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Eugene Hanly
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969 following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the dispute.
Background:
The Complainant is employed as a Grade V11 Management Administrator since 12th November 2000. He is paid €2,273.00 per fortnight. He has claimed that he has raised a significant number of grievances and his employer has not addressed them. He is seeking to be promoted and given compensation for loss of income, an apology for their failures to properly address his many grievances, written guarantees about future conduct, written assurance of a good reference when he leaves, no adverse comments about him re-instatement of sick leave. |
Preliminary Point
Respondent
The Respondent stated that most or all of his grievances before this hearing are now the subject of a High Court case. They went through the High Court pleadings and confirmed that all of the matters before this adjudication hearing are also before the High Court.
They stated that the Complainant cannot prosecute his claims before two fora for the same matters in dispute. They are seeking that this hearing is cancelled and that all matter are dealt with by the superior court.
Claimanat’s Representative
They stated that they were only made aware of the High Court case and that they accept that most of the grievances before this adjudication hearing are in their opinion the same as that before the High Court. Therefore they believe that these claims before this hearing should be struck out. Issues in dispute cannot be adjudicated upon in two fora.
Complainant
He stated that the issues were not the same. He was seeking compensation for the damages to his health caused by his employer’s failures to address his issues.
Decision on the preliminary point
I have examined the High Court pleadings and I am satisfied that there is significant overlap between the claims before this hearing and the High Court.
I have decided that it is not appropriate that I should adjudicate on matters that are the subject of a hearing in a superior court.
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.]
I recommend that the Complainant should have his matters that are referred to the High Court adjudicated upon. I recommend that in the event that any of his grievances are not dealt with in the High Court he should have direct meetings with the Respondent with a view to having these outstanding matters addressed at local level. I recommend that then and only then should he refer to the Workplace Relations Commission any agreed outstanding matters not addressed by the High Court and not resolved in company having been raised and exhausted at local level. |
Dated: 07 July 2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Eugene Hanly
Key Words:
Promotion, General Grievances |