ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference:
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Technician | Manufacturing Company |
Representatives |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
CA-00026164-001 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing:
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969 following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the dispute.
Background:
The dispute is in relation to the issuing of a final written warning to the employee concerned. The employee believes that his warning was issued without going through proper procedures and was in breach of natural justice. The employee is requesting that the issuing of the warning be expunged from his file, that he receives an apology regarding this matter and that he be compensated for the stress caused to him. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The employee is a long serving member of staff having commenced employment in 1976. He retired in July 2019. In October 2018 the employee was issued with a formal caution for taking an unofficial break. The employee subsequently had a short conversation with a team leader in relation to that matter. The employee was then called to two meetings at which the attitude of management was both hostile and intimidatory and questioned regarding the conversation that he had had with the team leader. The employee then attended a disciplinary hearing following which he was issued with a final written warning. The employee wished to appeal this sanction but he was eventually informed that the employer did not have anyone available who could conduct an appeal hearing. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The employee received a verbal warning in October 2018 in relation to time-keeping. Shortly afterwards the employee was involved in an interaction with a colleague who then made a complaint about the employee’s conduct. Following a disciplinary hearing at which the employee was represented he was issued with a final written warning. The employer is willing to expunge the warning from the employee’s file. |
Findings and Conclusions:
On 22 October 2018, following two meetings, the employee was issued with a Formal Caution regarding time spent on a break. ON 1 November the employee was summoned at short notice to attend a meeting and to bring a shop steward with him. The employee was questioned about a complaint that had been received from another worker regarding a conversation that the employee had initiated about the background to the caution. The employee refused to answer any questions until his accuser was either present or named. The HR Manager subsequently produced a document recording this meeting as an “exploratory meeting”. On 3 January 2019 a second “exploratory” meeting took place at which the employee gave an account of his conversation with the other worker. He denied that he had harassed anyone. A disciplinary hearing was held the next day conducted by the same persons who had carried out the exploratory meeting, i.e. the Operations Manager and the HR Officer. The former advised the employee that the company could not tolerate bullying, harassment or intimidation of an employee and the HR Officer informed the employee that he was being issued with a final written warning. On 9 January the employee’s union informed the company that the employee wished to appeal the disciplinary sanction. Following further exchanges between he parties the employer informed the union on 30 January that there was no person suitable who was available to conduct an appeal and apparently suggested that the matter be referred to the WRC. The employee referred the dispute to the WRC on 8 February 2019. At the adjudication hearing the union’s submission listed the many defects and breaches of the company’s own procedures that had occurred in respect of this matter. The employee’s long service and unblemished record were also pointed out. For their part the employer accepted that there was substance to the union’s position and further stated that it’s existing procedures are long-standing and in need of review. It is clear from this, and indeed from my own review of the documentation and other evidence before me, that the procedures adopted by management with regard to the issuing of a final written warning were defective. There were clear breaches of the company’s own policies and the principles of natural justice. In fairness to the employer, this is now recognised and arising from this the employer stated at the hearing that they have concluded that the final written warning should be expunged from the employee’s record and they have invited the union to engage with them in a review of internal disciplinary procedures. The expungement of the disciplinary sanction from the employee’s file was the outcome originally sought by the union on behalf of the employee. At the hearing the issues of an apology and compensation were also raised. I accept that the employee justly felt aggrieved at the manner of his treatment (particularly, in his case, having regard to the fact that he was within months of his retirement after 42 years’ service), but given the company’s acceptance that it was incorrect in issuing a final written warning and it’s commitment to address faults identified by this issue, I do not believe that compensation is a matter for consideration. I do feel, however, that some form of apology is appropriate. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I find that the process and procedures adopted by the employer which led to the issuing of a final written warning were fundamentally flawed. I therefore recommend that the final written warning be expunged from the employee’s file and that all records held in relation to this matter be completely deleted. I further recommend that a letter be issued to the employee in the following terms.: The company is sorry that the issuing of a final written warning was dealt with in a manner that it now accepts as having been in variance with best practice and procedures. The company has accordingly expunged the final written warning from your personnel files and deleted all other records associated with this issue. The company confirms that you have a clean disciplinary record. Finally, I recommend that the company and union engage in a review of the company’s policies in respect of disciplinary and grievance procedures. |
Dated: December 16th 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Joe Donnelly
Key Words:
Final Written Warning Company Procedures |