FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : TESCO IRELAND LTD (REPRESENTED BY IBEC) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY MANDATE TRADE UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. An appeal of an Adjudication Officer's Decision no: ADJ-00011498.
BACKGROUND:
2. This case is an appeal by the Union on behalf of the Worker of an Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation. On the 27th July 2018 the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation:-
- “I believe the Respondent was justified in issuing the Complainant with a Final Written Warning. The Complainant’s participation in industrial action was unofficial and unauthorised.
It is noted that the Final Written Warning issued to the Complainant expired on 8th June 2018 and at hearing it was accepted by the Respondent that it would be removed from the Complainant’s record and not be brought up in future. As part of my Recommendation I ask that the Respondent confirms this fact, in writing, to the Complainant.”.
The Worker appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on the 7th August 2018 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 12th October 2018.
DECISION:
This is an appeal by an employee against the Recommendation of an Adjudication Officer Adj-00011498 CA-00015222-001 in her claim against her employer under the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and concerned a final written warning given to the Claimant.
The Adjudication Officer noted that the warning issued to the Claimant had expired on 8thJune 2018 and that it would be removed from her file and not referred to in the future. He recommended that the Respondent confirm this fact to the Claimant in writing.
The Union appealed this Recommendation and submitted to the Court that as the Claimant was involved in official industrial action between14thand 24thFebruary 2017 that she should not have been issued with a warning for her absence from work during this time.
The employer stated that as the branch she worked in was not involved in industrial action, no notice of industrial actions in respect of that branch had been issued to it and the Claimant’s absence from work amounted to unauthorised absence. She was warned that unless she returned to work she may face disciplinary action.
The Claimant was issued with a final written warning on 8thJune 2017, to remain live on her personnel file for a period of 12 months and has therefore now expired.
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court recommends that the final written warning be expunged from the Claimant’s personnel file. The Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation is varied accordingly.
The Court so Recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
CR______________________
23rd October, 2018Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.