ADJ-00012242

Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Mr. Y

A Respondent

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-00016215-003

08/12/2017

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

CA-00016215-004

08/12/2017

The complainant commenced employment with the respondent on 29/09/2008 as a warehouse operative.

1.He contends that he has been bullied and treated disrespectfully by a colleague and that his complaint has not been properly addressed.

2.He is appealing against the sanction of a verbal warning meted out to him following the use of the disciplinary procedure against him

He presented these two complaints to the WRC on 8/12/2017.

1.CA-00016215-003.

The complainant made a complaint of bullying and harassment against his line manager to the confidential number supplied by the respondent on the 12/6/17 to which he received no response. He states that on the night of the 9/6/17, the line manager persistently told him he was too slow. He advises that his line manager makes malicious comments about his work. The complainant states that he has asked the line manager to assist him in working more efficiently if the line manager thinks that he is working too slowly. He advises that the line manager responded that he is too busy.

He advises that the respondent failed to investigate his complaint. He advises that this has upset him and has impacted negatively on his productivity in the sense that before these incidents he was loading more crates per hour.

2. CA -00016215-004.

The complainant is appealing the verbal warning issued to him on the 28/8/17.

His line manager complained about what he described as the complainant’s aggressive and inappropriate conduct towards him in a second incident on the 27/7/17. The respondent activated the disciplinary procedure on 11/8/17 which resulted in a verbal warning. The complainant appealed the sanction arguing that the disciplinary process only looked at his, the complainant’s behaviour, and not at the false statements made by the line manager to him, statements which he contends, prompted his behaviour. His appeal was not upheld.

He contends that the statements made by the line manager about his behaviour were false.

He has requested CCTV footage of the incidents

1.CA -0016215—003

The respondent advises that the complainant works on loading containers with goods for onward distribution to customers. There are company regulations as to the number of trucks which should be loaded per hour. It is up to the line manager to deal with situations where these targets are not met. The respondent advises that the complainant objected to how the line manager raised this matter with him on the 9/6/17 and submitted a complaint of bullying and harassment to the Support Contact Person(SCP) on 12/6/17. The SCP in this instance was the warehouse team manager, likely to have an involvement with the incident. In addition, by this time the same events of the 9/6/17 were now the subject of a formal complaint by the line manager about the complainant’s behaviour and had been lodged on an earlier date -the 9/6/17. Hence the grievance procedure, activated by the line manager concerning the complainant’s behaviour towards him was the first process used to investigate the incident of the 9/6/17.

The role of the SCP is to signpost the procedures to employees. Contrary to the complainant’s assertion, this did happen and the complainant did not follow on with his complaint using the grievance procedure or the code for dealing with complaints of bullying and harassment

The respondent was unable to come to any conclusions regarding the incident of the 9/6/17 as there were conflicting statements and no witnesses.

The code of practice on bullying and harassment is attached to the contract of employment.

2.CA-0016215-004

The appeal against the verbal warning was not upheld as the respondent had CCTV footage to hand (shown to the complainant) which showed him behaving in what seemed like a dismissive and agitated manner towards his line manager on 27/7/17. The respondent also relied on the evidence of a witness, a colleague, who corroborated the line manager’s evidence about the complainant’s behaviour towards him.

The respondent offered the complainant the opportunity to view the CCTV footage on site but advised him to contact company A, the warehouse owner, to obtain (take away) copies of CCTV footage, as the respondent has a contract to operate the warehouse but is not the owner of the warehouse.

1.CA-0016215-003.

Both complaints concern the exercise of authority by the line manager.

The complainant took the first step in processing a complaint of bullying but did not lodge a complaint as required by the procedure.

I am satisfied from the written and oral evidence submitted that the complainant was advised of the procedures but whether he understood what was conveyed to him is not that clear.

Upon enquiry, the respondent advised that they have trained mediators at their disposal. Given that the fractious relationship predates the incidents of the 9/6/17 and the 27/7/17, I recommend that the respondent engages mediators to work with the complainant and the line manager with a view to a resolution. The respondent indicated their acceptance of same.

Should that fail to deliver a resolution, the complainant should be given the option of using the Anti- Bullying and Harassment Procedure. He should be given clear and precise instructions as to the steps to be taken in prosecuting a complaint of bullying. Given that English is not his first language, the respondent should establish that he understands the steps which should be taken

The respondent should publicise the precise steps which an employee should follow in situations where the same incident provokes two complaints, each complainant accusing the other and identify which complaint takes precedence.

2.CA-00016215-004

Appeal against the verbal warning.The verbal warning expired in February.

I recommend that the matters giving rise to the activation of the disciplinary procedure which are about the line manager fulfilling company rules can be encompassed in the mediation sessions.

I recommend that as a first step the complainant engage with a mediation process to resolve issues with the line manager.

Should that fail to deliver a satisfactory outcome, the complainant can use the respondent’s procedures as outlined above

Complaint of bullying; incomplete use of procedure; appeal against a verbal warning.