Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Office Administrator

Manufacturing 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-00012595-001

17/07/2017

The complainant has been employed as an office administrator by the respondent company for over 20 years. The dispute was referred to the WRC when the complainant was absent on sick leave due to work related stress and was attempting to initiate dialogue with the respondent’s Managing Director in order to resolve a conflict situation in the workplace. There were no established Grievance or Bullying / Harassment Procedures in place.

The complainant was suffering harassment in the course of her duties from the MD’s daughter, a company Director.

This had been ongoing for some time but had now become unacceptable.

The complainant was absent from work and had been diagnosed as suffering from work related stress.

The complainant has contacted the Managing Director, who lives abroad for most of the year, in order to resolve matters but has failed to get a response.

The respondent denies that the complainant was being harassed.

The complainant and the Director who also worked in the office had had some disagreements over time but the Director felt that the complainant was deliberately preventing her from being more involved in the operations of the company.

The respondent has now put in place formal procedures for dealing with grievances and complaints in the workplace.

This dispute was heard in conjunction with the complaints contained in ADJ-10188.

In effect this issue was overtaken by events insofar as within weeks of submitting the dispute under the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, the complainant’s employment was terminated. These matters are the subject of the complaints contained in ADJ-10188 and are dealt with within that context. As the employment relationship has now ended there is no basis for a Recommendation on how to resolve matters within the workplace.   I will, however, make a general Recommendation in regard to these matters.

The company has obviously grown over the years and now employs about 14 staff but this has not been matched by the manner in which it is managed. The Managing Director is spending less time physically in the country but maintains control over decision making and has failed to install a professional management structure to deal with the day to day running of the business. This is evident in the HR area where there are no Staff Handbooks and no formal policies or procedures in place for dealing with issues that arise in that area.   It is unacceptable that an employee such as the complainant, who the respondent themselves identified as a key person, should be ignored when they communicated with the MD in an attempt to resolve matters.

It is therefore recommended that a HR Audit is undertaken in order to identify all the issues that need to be addressed with a view to putting in place the structures and policies required for the company in the present day.