ADJUDICATION RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00022871
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Cleaner | A School |
Representatives | SIPTU |
|
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00029452-001 | 03/07/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 08/11/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the dispute.
Background:
The worker detailed that the employer did not utilise fair procedures when dealing with her grievance. |
Summary of Worker’s Case:
The worker made a complaint against a teacher on 10 September 2018. On 26th November 2018 the worker received a letter detailing that the complaint had been dealt with and that the employer was satisfied that her complaint was not upheld.
It was detailed that this letter was issued albeit no interviews with the worker had taken place and no details of any interviews conducted were provided. The worker appealed the decision and on 18 April 2019 she was advised that the decision of the principal was upheld. It was outlined by the worker that the Board had information in their possession regarding the complaint which the worker had not received. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The employer outlined that they had investigated the allegations made by the worker. There was no evidence to support her claims and the worker did not succeed in her appeal to the Board of Management.
|
Findings and Conclusions:
A complaint was made against another employee and the employer investigated same. It was not disputed that the employer did not share, with the worker, the details of interviews that took place.
I have reviewed the Code of Practice for dealing with complaints of Bullying and Harassment which applies to this school as well as the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedure contained in the Industrial Relations Act, 1990 (Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures) (Declaration) Order, 2000, S. I. 146 of 2000 which the Court outlined: “It is clear from the Code of Practice as a whole that its object is to provide for good employment practice in the internal processing of grievance and disciplinary issues. To that end it provides that procedures must be fair and in conformity with the principles of natural justice.“
I find that the employer tried to deal with a difficult situation between workers and investigated the matter but it was no fully compliant with the expected laws of natural justice including “that employee grievances are fairly examined and processed”. Due to the unique circumstances of this case, I recommend that the employer pay the worker €250 for breach of procedure.
|
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
Due to the unique circumstances of this case, I recommend that the employer pay the worker €250 for breach of procedure. |
Dated: 14th February 2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Key Words:
Industrial relations act, procedure |