FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : TESCO IRELAND LIMITED TESCO IRELAND - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY MANDATE TRADE UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Treacy |
1. Appeal Of Adjudication Officer Recommendation No(s)ADJ-00011123 CA-00014831-001
BACKGROUND:
2. On 25 June 2018, the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation: Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
"That the Final Written Warning should remain only on the worker's file for a period of 8 months and not for 12 months as was the case.
That the employer gives to the worker a store voucher to the value of €75 within a month of this recommendation to be spent within six months of receipt of same from the employer."
The Union on behalf of the worker appealed the Recommendation of the Adjudication Officer on 2 August 2018. A Labour Court hearing took place on 27 March 2019.
DECISION:
This matter comes before the Court as an appeal under the Industrial Relations Acts arising from a decision of an Adjudication Officer in respect of a trade dispute involving a single worker, the Complainant.
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 6thJune 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 Complainant has no meaning for the Complainant in terms of her employment or her relationship with her employer since 5thJune 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.
The Court therefore recommends that the parties accept that the matter was resolved as an industrial relations matter on 5thJune 2018 when the impugned warning ceased to have existence.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
CC______________________
10 April 2019Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.