ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00008213

Parties:

Complaints:

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 18/09/2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim O'Connell

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act and Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969] 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).

 CA-00010718-001

Terms of Employment(Information) Act 1994

Background

The claimant commenced employment with the respondent on the 12th August 2009 and she stated she did not receive a contract of employment with 2 months of commencing work. The respondent disputed the complaint and submitted a contract of employment dated the 19th August 2009 which was duly signed by the claimant

Findings

I find that having reviewed the contract of employment it was signed by the claimant on the 19th August 2009.

Decision:

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

I find that the complaint is not well founded and falls.

CA-00019718-002

Industrial Relations Act 1969

Background

The claimant commenced employment with the respondent on the 12th August 2009.

The claimant stated on her complaint form that the respondent failed to investigate her written bullying complaint under the Code of Practice for Employers and Employees on the Prevention and Resolution of Bullying at work. She stated that she was currently out of work on stress.

The respondent submitted that the claimant made a complaint to a respondent’s representative on the 19th July 2016, and on the following day 20thJuly 2016 the matter had been assigned to an investigator who approached the claimant and began to address the matter. However, later that same day the claimant left work and attended CUMH, and did not return to work, nor has the claimant returned to work since that date.

It is the respondent position that the matter to which the claimant is complaining about was responded to and the investigation had commenced. Due to the claimant’s own situation, the matter was delayed, and remains delayed to this very day. The respondent wrote to the claimant on the 9th August, in response to the letter received from the Clinical Social Worker, explaining the situation, due to the illness of the claimant, the matter could not proceed and no responses was received indicating that the claimant was happy to proceed even though she was absent.

Nothing was heard from the claimant until the respondent was notified of a referral to the WRC. It was the respondent position that the claimant’s complaint that the respondent failed to investigate the allegation that she was bullied, is unfounded, the process had begun and the only reason why it has not been concluded is due to the unavailability of the claimant.

Findings

I find that having heard the verbal submission from the claimant and a written from the respondent. The claimant is still out on sick leave and she has not returned to her place of employment.

I find that the respondent acted promptly in appointing an investigator to hear the complaint. I find that while the claimant is out sick the process came to a standstill.

Recommendation

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.

I find that based on the evidence at the hearing the respondent acted promptly, however I would recommend that when the claimant is fit to return to her employment a meeting takes place between the parties to identify any issues that may require to be resolved between them going forward.

Dated:   November 7th 2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim O'Connell

Key Words: