FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : TESCO IRELAND LTD - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY MANDATE TRADE UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Appeal Of Adjudication Officer Recommendation No: ADJ-00011441 CA-00015213-001
BACKGROUND:
2. This matter was referred to an Adjudication Officer for investigation and Recommendation.
On 5 September 2018 the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation:-
- “I recommend in favour of the Respondent with the stipulation that the Final Written Warning is removed after a period of six months”.
The Worker appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on 12 September 2018 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
A Labour Court hearing took place on 7 November 2018.
DECISION:
This matter comes before the Court as an appeal under the Industrial Relations Acts arising from the referral of a trade dispute to the Workplace Relations Commission involving a single worker, the Appellant.
The Court has been made aware by the Trade Union of the general background for this trade dispute and is conscious that the matter before the Court arises from events occurring during an industrial dispute in 2017.
Good industrial relations are underpinned by an approach which is pragmatic and realistic. The Court has considered the within dispute in that context and has examined the facts presented by the parties in order that it can develop a decision which can best support the resolution of the trade dispute originally referred to the Workplace Relations Commission.
The Court is asked to give a decision in relation to a final written warning which was issued to the worker on 1stJune 2017. The disciplinary procedure of the Respondent provides that a final written warning shall ‘remain on a staff member’s personnel file for 12 months’. On plain reading therefore, the procedure makes no provision for the warning to remain on that file for a day longer than 12 months. The Court finds therefore that the warning has no existence following the lapse of 12 months from date of issue.
The Court therefore concludes, in accordance with the disciplinary code under which it was issued, that the fact of a written warning having been issued to the Appellant has no meaning for the Appellant in terms of his employment or his relationship with his employer since 31stMay 2018. In those circumstances the Court has decided that no decision it could make on the substance of the within matter could have any effect on the worker concerned and indeed could make no positive contribution to whatever wider issues might currently pertain in the employment generally.
The Court therefore recommends that the parties should accept that the matter was resolved as an industrial relations matter on 30thMay 2018 when the impugned warning ceased to have existence.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
MK______________________
12 November 2018Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Mary Kehoe, Court Secretary.