FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : TESCO IRELAND LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY MANDATE TRADE UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms O'Donnell Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Mr Hall |
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer's Recommendation No: ADJ-00011530.
BACKGROUND:
2. This case is in relation to a disciplinary sanction issued to the worker by the employer.
The matter was referred to an Adjudication Officer for investigation and recommendation. On 27 June 2018 the Adjudication Officer issued the following recommendation:-
"Having considered the submissions of both parties to this dispute, I recommend that the final written warning remain on the worker's file. On expiry the warning should be treated in the same manner as other expired warnings as confirmed by management i.e. not used or referenced again in any future disciplinary process".
The union on behalf of the Worker appealed the Adjudication Officer's Recommendation to the Labour Court on 25 July 2018 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
A Labour Court hearing took place on 27 February 2019.
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.
In this particular case the Worker is alleged to have acted in an inappropriate manner on the picket line and on that basis was subjected to a disciplinary process. The Court is asked to give a decision in relation to a final written warning which was issued to the worker on 29th June 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’. The Employer confirmed to the Court that the warning expired on the 28thJune 2018. 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 her employment or her relationship with her employer since 8thJune 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 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 warning should therefore be removed from the Worker’s file.
The Court so recommends. The recommendation of the Adjudication Officer should be varied accordingly.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Louise O'Donnell
20 March 2019______________________
MNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Michael Neville, Court Secretary.