FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : CONNOLLY HOSPITAL (REPRESENTED BY YVETTE KEATING) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY DES J KAVANAGH HR CONSULTANCY) DIVISION :
SUBJECT: 1.An appeal of an Adjudication Officer's Decision No. ADJ-00024699.
A Labour Court hearing took place on 30 July 2020. DECISION: The Appeal This matter came before the Court by way of an appeal from a Recommendation of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00024699, dated 5 March 2020). The Adjudication Officer recommended that the Worker’s grievance with her employer, Connolly Hospital/HSE (‘the Hospital’), should be considered as resolved and declined to recommend payment of compensation to the Worker. The Court heard the appeal pursuant to section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969, in a virtual courtroom on 30 July 2020. Background to the Dispute The Worker commenced employment with the Hospital in 2003 as part-time Clerical Officer. In September 2018 she was assigned as a Grade III Clerical Officer to a new role in the Hospital’s reception area. The events which give rise to the within dispute took place on 23 January 2019. The Worker was performing her duties in the Admissions Office on that date but was also required to attend matters at the reception desk as one of her colleagues was on leave. A security officer at the hospital complained to a colleague in A&E that the Worker was not attending to her duties at the reception desk. That colleague in turn passed the complaint to her own line manager. It appears that the original recipient of the complaint about the Worker further circulated details of the complaint to other colleagues by email. The Worker became aware that she had been the subject of adverse commentary, which she regarded as unfair and unfounded, amongst colleagues and, therefore initiated a formal grievance on 27 January 2019. The Worker went on sick leave in or around this time following an accident in the workplace. She required one week’s leave to recover from the accident. However, due to the stress she was experiencing arising from the events that had been unfolding since 23 January 2019 she extended her sick leave and did not return to work until 19 July 2019. In the meantime, there was considerable correspondence exchanged between the Worker and Hospital Management in relation to the progression of the Worker’s Grievance, her sick pay and her return to work. The Worker felt compelled to seek written clarifications in relation to each of these matters on a number of occasions. The Worker was retained on full pay pending the conclusion of the Grievance Process and was then placed on half pay with effect from 1 July 2019. Her pay ceased on 5 July 2019. The Worker submits that the Hospital failed to deal with her grievance in accordance with the timelines set down in the Grievance Policy and that the protracted nature of the process exacerbated the stress and anxiety she experienced, notwithstanding the ultimate outcome which upheld her grievance. The Worker also submits that her otherwise excellent sick leave record has been grossly distorted due to her extended absence from work in 2019 as a consequence of the events set in train on 23 January 2019. She is seeking the following from the Court by way of redress for the maltreatment she says was visited upon her by the Hospital: her sick leave in 2019 to be expunged from her record or, in the alternative, a payment of €7,000.00 “which would act as a cushion in the event that [she] requires sick leave over the next few years”; a further payment of €10,000.00 “in compensation for the delays and poor treatment [she] experienced with resultant stress and distress”; and “comprehensive consultations” between the Worker and her employer in relation to any repayment of overpayment of sick pay that may have occurred in her case. The Hospital submits that the Worker – by virtue of her absence for a period of 26 weeks – exhausted her entitlement to sick leave and there is no mechanism in place whereby the Worker’s attendance record can be subsequently amended. The Hospital further submits that it significantly extended the Worker’s rate of sick pay. As a half-time employee, contracted to work 18 hours per week, the Worker’s sick pay entitlement is pro-rated to 50% of that of a comparable full-time worker. The Worker should, therefore, have been placed off pay on 29 April 2019 until she resumed duty on 19 July 2019. Having regard to the particulars of the Worker’s situation, the Hospital provided full pay to the Worker from 31 January 2019 to 1 July 2019 less social welfare deductions of €203.00 per week. Accordingly, the Hospital submits that the Worker has no claim for loss of earnings. Decision The Court upholds the Recommendation of the Adjudication Officer in full. The Worker’s grievance was fully investigated and the matter resolved in her favour. The Court does not recommend concession of any of the claims for compensation advanced on the Worker’s behalf. The Court so recommends.
NOTE Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary. |
