FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : BUS EIREANN - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY NBRU) DIVISION :
SUBJECT: 1.An appeal of an Adjudication Officer's Decision No(s)ADJ-00021540 CA-00028453-001 Background to the Dispute This is an appeal on behalf of the Worker from a Recommendation of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00021540, dated 10 December 2019) under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. The Adjudication Officer recommended in favour of the Worker and awarded him compensation of €2,000.00 “for being the subject of unfair treatment after applying for a promotional position”. The Court heard the appeal (remotely) on 18 June 2020. The within dispute concerns events subsequent to the Worker’s unsuccessful application for promotion to the grade of Inspector in Bus Eireann’s (‘the Company’) Automatic Vehicle Location (‘AVL’) office in Waterford. There are three elements to the Worker’s complaint: (a) the notes taken at his interview for promotion in March 2018 were shredded; (b) as a consequence of (a) he was unable to obtain satisfactory feedback and (c) he was denied the opportunity to avail himself of the Company’s grievance process in relation to the foregoing. The Worker’s Submission The Worker submits that on learning that he had been unsuccessful in the promotional competition in March 2018 he enquired if he could appeal that decision but was told there was no appeal provided for but that he could request feedback on his performance at interview. The Worker attended a feedback meeting but was dissatisfied with the quality of the feedback he received and with the Company’s refusal to allow him to raise issues in relation to the interview process. (It subsequently transpired, following a data access request, that the notes made by the Company’s representative during the promotional interview had been shredded.) The Worker was also unhappy that he had not been permitted to be accompanied or represented at the feedback meeting. Thereafter, the Worker made enquiries from the Company’s HR Department as to how to initiate the Grievance Procedure but received no response. He believes that he was effectively denied the opportunity to utilise the Grievance Procedure in the circumstances. He then proceeded to make a protected disclosure within the meaning of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014. The Worker submits that the post-interview events he complains of strongly suggest that the interview process itself lacked transparency. He is seeking compensation for the events outlined above which he submits should be assessed in light of his loss of opportunity for an increased salary and pension entitlements. The Company’s Submission The Company, in a very brief written submission, requested the Court to uphold the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation at first instance. It also cited Labour Court Recommendation LCR22196 in which the Court awarded €1,000.00 in compensation to the Worker concerned in that case for procedural failures on the Company’s part in the promotional competition he had applied for. Decision Having considered both Parties’ written and verbal submissions, the Court upholds the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation in full. The Court so decides.
NOTE Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to David Campbell, Court Secretary. |
