Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A Worker

A Public Body

Representatives

Unite

Byrne Wallace

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-00026357-001

19/02/2019

The worker is in dispute with his employer over end of year performance/appraisal rating for 2017 conducted under the Performance Management and Development Programme (PMDP). For the year 2017, the worker received a low performance grade which he did not agree with or accept and he appealed against the rating as per the appeals process of PMDP. The worker states that he submitted an appeal and followed the normal company process. The Worker states that he was subsequently denied the right to refer the matter to an independent appeal officer as provided for by the company’s policy.

The worker’s union requests that the company should uphold its own policy and should allow the worker prompt and speedy access to an independent appeal for the year 2017.

The employer states that it has applied its agreed procedures to the worker’s employment, including setting objectives or seeking to do so, following its Performance Management and Development Programme (PMDP) process including providing the worker with access to internal and external appeal procedures and applying its disciplinary procedure in accordance with the requirement of that procedure.

The employer states that the worker brought High Court proceedings against it and a judgement issued in the worker’s favour on 15 April 2011. The employer states that the worker raised matters with it after the proceedings had concluded and the employer had complied with the High Court Order. The employer appointed Mr. Mark Connaughton SC to address matters between it and the worker. Mr. Connaughton issued his report in September 2014. The employer states that it remains willing to implement this report.

The employer submits that it has been working with the trade union UNITE and with another public body with a view to agreeing a secondment for the worker to that public body (as requested by the worker) for three days per week. The employer states that it has not yet concluded an arrangement in that regard but continues to work with a view to doing so and to identifying appropriate work for the worker to carry out for the employer for the balance of the working week. In that context, the employer states that 2019 objectives have not been set for the worker and the worker will not be disadvantaged by that fact.

Both parties at the hearing outlined their perspective positions on the issues. Following engagement on both sides, it was agreed by the parties that both 2017 and 2018 performance ratings for the worker will be referred to the external independent appeals officer Dr. B at the independent appeals stage as per the Performance Management and Development Programme (PMDP) process.

I recommend

(i)                  the implementation of the agreement between the parties in relation to both 2017 and 2018 performance ratings for the worker to be referred to the external independent appeals officer Dr. B at the independent appeals stage as per the PMDP process.

(ii)                Dr. B to meet with the complainant within 2 months of the date of this decision with a view to the Appeal process being conducted without undue delay.