Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A Shop Worker

A Shop

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

CA-00030386-001

20/08/2019

The Complainant started work as a Shop Assistant with the Respondent on 15th March 2019 and resigned from her employment on 18th August 2019 due to an incident which she claimed involved inappropriate behaviour by Mr A. She said that she had a number of difficulties with Mr A prior to this, particularly in relation to the way he spoke to her, and stated that he regularly did not use her name. She believed that this was because she was a foreign national.

The Complainant stated that she had a number of difficulties with Mr A during the course of her employment, particularly in relation to the way he spoke to her and stated that he regularly did not use her name. She believed that this was because she was a foreign national. She stated that the incident which led to her resignation arose while she was holding a tray. She said that Mr A kicked it several times to put it back in its place and by doing so almost kicked her hand. She stated that she panicked as a result and informed Mr A that she was going to leave her employment. Having been informed that she was finishing, Mr A followed her around the premises until she left which made her feel intimidated.

The Respondent stated that at no juncture throughout the Complainant’s employment had she made any allegations about any issues with Mr A, while carrying out her duties. It was also pointed out that if the Complainant had any such difficulties, she should have used the processes detailed in both her contract of employment and employee handbook. The Respondent also disputed the events that led directly to the Complainant’s dismissal and produced video evidence which showed the interaction with Mr A. He claimed that there was no aggression in the action included in the video. Following this interaction, the Complainant approached him and stated that she was resigning because she had found work elsewhere. It was also highlighted that a member of the management team wrote to her a week later, asking her to reconsider her position and referred her to the procedures in the company handbook.

While the Complainant made a number of allegations surrounding Mr A’s treatment of her prior to the incident that resulted in her resignation, these were all denied. It is difficult to understand why if the Complainant had a number of difficulties with him during her employment, she failed to raise these directly with Mr A or indeed with any other member of management given that there were clearly outlined processes and procedures in both her contract of employment and the company handbook, both of which she acknowledged receiving.

Having reviewed the video evidence, I am satisfied that there was nothing untoward surrounding Mr A’s interaction with the Complainant in relation to the event which allegedly led to her resignation. Specifically, while there was no sound on the video, I believe that nothing I saw could constitute a breach of her dignity and respect in the workplace.

It is also difficult to understand why, even if I chose to accept the Complainant’s argument that she panicked on the day of the incident which led to her resignation, she did not raise any concerns after she left the company’s employment, especially in circumstances where the company wrote to her a week after resigning asking her to reconsider her decision and referring her to the procedures in the company handbook.

In conclusion, given her failure to invoke either the formal or informal procedures included in both the contract of employment and employee handbook, which she acknowledged receiving, I believe that this complaint is without merit.

CA-00030386-001: Given that the complaint is without merit, I am unable to make a recommendation in favour of the Complainant.