LCR22223

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/19/339

RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR22223

SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969

PARTIES :

A THIRD LEVEL INSTITUTION

- AND -

A WORKER
(REPRESENTED BY TEACHERS UNION OF IRELAND)

DIVISION :

Chairman:	Mr Geraghty
Employer Member:	Ms Doyle
Worker Member:	Ms Treacy

SUBJECT:

1.Inappropriate Behaviour

BACKGROUND:

2.The case concerns a claim by the Worker that he was the victim of inappropriate behaviour by a line manager during a formal ‘Course Board Meeting’.

The Employer’s position is that this matter was dealt with appropriately in accordance with the nationally agreed Grievance Procedure.

On 14 October 2019, the Worker, referred this dispute to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.

A Labour Court hearing took place on 3 June 2020.

UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

3 The grievance relates to the employer’s failure to exercise its duty of care to the member, by

1) not providing information and support, taking steps and putting appropriate measures in place to protect the member in the workplace after a report was made of a serious workplace violence incident.
2) The employer failed to take the member’s grievance seriously and subjected the processing of the grievance to excessive delays. The employer’s failure to act in a timely and appropriate manner has resulted in continued and ongoing hurt and damage to our member.
3) The member considers the manager’s action was workplace violence and that it was deliberate, intentional, and directed at the member

4EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:

In respect of three specific forms of redress sought by the Worker:

1) Neither the Employer, nor the Labour Court pursuant to these proceedings, has the authority to compel an unconditional apology from the Worker’s line manager in this case.
2) The claim for a ‘statement from the Employer ensuring my health and safety’ is not understood in the circumstances.
3) The Employer denies that the Worker has suffered any ‘serious damage and hurt’ as claimed, and that it could be responsible for any damage/hurt in the circumstances which would warrant the payment of compensation, as claimed.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Court notes that the Worker suffered behaviour that was most inappropriate, by any definition, and the Court acknowledges his understandable distress and hurt. In this regard, the Court notes that the Employer indicated at the hearing that they were willing to issue an apology. The Court recommends that they do so at the earliest opportunity.

The Court notes also that the Employer re-stated, at the hearing, its commitment to provide a safe place of work for all its employees. This, of course, includes those who are subject to unacceptable behaviour. The Court recommends that the Employer should continue to take all reasonable steps to ensure maximum safety for its employees at all times and to handle any complaints, if they arise, in a timely and sensitive fashion.

Stage 4 of the employer’s agreed Grievance Procedure requires the use of the Workplace Relations Commission. The Court notes that the Employer declined to attend adjudication at the Commission but indicated a willingness to attend mediation. At the very least, this is a breach of the spirit of the Employer’s own procedure. The Court expects that, in the interests of good industrial relations, all parties will operate agreed processes to the fullest extent possible in any future cases.

The Court recommends that this matter be brought to a close on the basis set out above.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court

	Tom Geraghty
NJ	______________________
3 June 2020	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Noel Jordan, Court Secretary.