ADJ-00007081

Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Postal Operative

Postal Company

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-00009621-001

09/02/2017

The Worker is employed as a Postal Operative since 2002. He is paid €600 per week. He has claimed that his manager attempted to get him to lie in order to cover up a situation at work.

Summary of Worker’s Position

There have been longstanding industrial relations difficulties in this depot, which has led to a toxic atmosphere. Relationships between local management and staff deteriorated to such an extent that a dispute was almost inevitable. Meetings between the union representatives and management have brought about an improvement in relations. A mechanism was agreed to deal with matters of concern. Any outstanding matters would then be referred to the WRC. This case arises from this process.

A dispute arose in the depot between the local manager and the local union representative regarding two absences on the midnight term of duty. The local manager and an operative were absent from duty. The local union representative advised management that as they knew about the absence in advance he should have arranged cover as is the norm. The manager stated that he was unaware of the absence in advance and so could not have arranged cover. The Worker received a ‘phone call from his manager advising him to “stick with the story” and to say that he was not told of the absence until the last minute. He was repeatedly asked to say that. He felt pressure to lie. A meeting took place with the Operations Manager who undertook to investigate this allegation. But he never received any response.

He is seeking an acknowledgement from management that he was wronged and that he should not have been placed in such a difficult situation to lie.

Summary of Employer’s Position

It is accepted that the industrial relations environment was challenging and verging on being terminally broken. Relations between management and some staff were strained.

They stated that they are not aware of any complaint made by this Worker. They did interview him in connection with another matter but not this one. They acknowledge that relations had been very strained in the depot. A protracted process of interviews, enquiries and meetings took place and they proposed a way forward to resolve these issues. However an agreed process was slow in coming. This process commenced in February 2017 and progress has been made.

Findings and Conclusions

I note the history of bad relations between management and workers in this depot.

I note the efforts of both sides to address this problem.

I note that progress has been made in this regard.

I note the Employer’s position that they were unaware of this particular complaint despite the Worker’s assertion that a meeting took place to deal with it.

I find that if this matter was not raised and exhausted at local level then it is inappropriate that I should deal with it.

I refer to the Labour Court decision NT 1014, it stated, “The Court is not prepared to insert itself into the procedural process in a situation where the dispute resolution procedures have been bypassed”.

This matter appears to be two sides with two different positions and I believe that it would not serve any purpose to drag this matter into the open given the urgent need to put the past behind themselves and get on with the normalisation of relations.