ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00018111
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Manager | A Child Health Service Provider |
Representatives |
|
|
Dispute:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00023340-001 | 19/11/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 20/02/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969following 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 worker believes that her role has been abolished and that the employer has not engaged with her in any meaningful manner regarding her continued employment. |
Summary of Worker’s Case:
The worker commenced work in 1998 and is in her current role since 2006; a role which had been one of significant responsibility.
Structural changes took place in 2014 whereby her organisation moved from one of local management to national management. The worker was aware that her role would change but was not advised to the extent which her responsibilities and status would have been eroded and she feels that she has in effect been demoted. The worker outlined that this is in breach of the Dignity at Work policy with her role and responsibilities belittled which has impacted on her health. In December 2016 she was given a different job title with no contract or terms and conditions provided and the job description that was attached relates to a clerical role which is not appropriate for her work. The worker has requested to meet with senior management but this has not happened.
It is the worker’s belief that she no longer holds a management function and that when she leaves, her role will not be replaced. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The employer detailed that there had been restructuring but that the worker has been assigned duties and responsibilities appropriate to her grade. It was outlined that the worker continues to secure the same terms and conditions as she had prior to the restructuring.
The employer outlined that they valued a positive relationship with the worker and would be willing to engage with her regarding her roles and responsibilities. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The worker did not wish to pursue her dispute regarding alleged ageist remarks that had been made against her. It appeared that she remained upset at the changes that came about as a result of the restructuring and what she saw as the employer’s failure to engage with her regarding how this would impact her.
I would recommend that the employer meet with the worker regarding her roles and responsibilities including how her valued skills can best be engaged by the employer. |
Decision:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I would recommend that the employer meet with the worker regarding her roles and responsibilities and how her valued skills can best be engaged by the employer. |
Dated: 07/08/19
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Key Words:
Roles and responsibilities, Industrial Relations Act |