Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A Working Leader

A Postal Service

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-00030519-001

27/08/2019

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

CA-00030692-001

02/09/2019

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

CA-00030692-002

02/09/2019

The worker is employed as a Working Leader and has referred three issues to the Workplace Relations Commission.

CA-00030519-001

This issue relates to a complaint that the worker made in relation to an incident that occurred on or about 12th April 2019 where he alleges that he was verbally abused by a work colleague. The worker stated that he raised a formal grievance by letter to the employer on 24th April 2019 and did not receive a response.

CA-00030692-001

This issue relates to complaints that were made against the worker by two colleagues.

CA-000300692-002

This issue relates to a grievance that the worker raised in his correspondence on April 2019 that he is prevented from acting up to the grade of Delivery Services Manager (DSM) within his area on the basis of his involvement in a previous complaint against his Manager which resulted in her removal from the office in question.

CA-00030519-001

The worker contends that this complaint has not been dealt with in line with agreed grievance procedures. The worker stated that he wrote to the employer on 24th April 2019 making a complaint about the conduct of his co-worker towards him as well as other issues and did not receive a response.

CA-00030692-001

The worker stated that two of his colleagues made false complaints against him following his involvement in complaints made against his former Manager. The worker stated that the colleagues in question were close friends of his Manager and that their complaints against him were unfounded and submitted in bad faith. The worker is seeking that these complaints be formally withdrawn and that he receives a written apology from the two individuals in question. The worker is also seeking a formal investigation into the two people in question relating to their malicious complaints and their refusal to enter into mediation on the issue.

CA-00030692-002

The worker stated that he is being prevented from acting up to the role of DSM as a result of his complaint and subsequent investigation into the previous DSM who was removed from the office in question as a result of an internal disciplinary process. The worker stated that, although he would have acted up to the role of DSM in normal circumstances, he was not permitted to act up as the employer stated that it would be prejudicial to its investigation into the DSM as the worker had been party to the complaints. The worker stated that this has denied him the opportunity to gain experience for future interviews as well as depriving him of the opportunity to earn additional income. The worker is seeking the monetary value of acting up into the role of DSM from 26th February 2018 until the date that the employer advertises for a new DSM in that location.

CA-00030519-001

The employer accepts that this grievance has not been processed in line with internal grievance procedures.

CA-00030692-001

The employer stated that it investigated the complaint’s made against the worker by his two colleagues and it was clarified to the worker that he had no case to answer. The employer stated that it is not in a position to carry out any further investigation into the two workers in question in relation to their complaints or their refusal to enter into a mediation process. In an attempt to resolve this issue, the employer committed to introducing a protocol of engagement in relation to future interactions between the staff concerned.

CA-00030692-002

The employer stated that the worker is not barred from acting up but that the disciplinary process concerning the former DSM has not yet concluded. The employer stated that the worker confirmed his understanding of this in an email of 5th July 2019 to senior management.

Utilising Local level procedures

It is well established that the WRC and the Labour Court have no role in investigating Industrial Relations disputes that have not been addressed at local level. In the within dispute, the worker referred a number of grievances to the employer which have not yet been dealt with in line with agreed procedures.

The Labour Court in INT1014 has also stated as follows:

“The Court is not prepared to insert itself into the procedural process in a situation where the dispute procedures have been bypassed.”

In relation to the specific disputes, I find as follows:

CA-00030519-001

This dispute has not been processed through agreed internal procedures. Accordingly, an Adjudication Officer has no role in carrying out an investigation in relation to the dispute.

CA-00030692-001

I note the employer’s position that the complaints submitted against the worker were investigated and it was clarified to the worker that he had no case to answer. I also accept the employer’s position that it cannot compel the workers in question to withdraw the complaints and provide a written apology to the worker.

In relation to the introduction of a protocol of engagement, I note that the worker was positively disposed to this course of action and that some progress has taken place on this issue. However, in correspondence submitted to the WRC on 21st February 2020 the worker indicated that it was unclear to him if the process was completed. The worker’s correspondence was sent to the employer by the WRC on 24th February 2020 seeking a response within 14 days. There was no response to this correspondence.

CA-00030692-002

This dispute has not been processed through agreed internal procedures as included in the worker’s letter to the employer on 24th April 2019. I note the commitment given by the employer at the adjudication hearing to process the worker’s grievance on this issue in line with agreed procedures within a three-month timeframe.

I acknowledge the stress and anxiety caused to the worker as a result of the issues he has raised in his correspondence to his employer and subsequent referral to the WRC. The employer, for its part, apologised to the worker at the adjudication hearing in relation to the distressed caused and the delay in processing his grievances.

Having considered the details of the referral, I recommend as follows:

CA-00030519-001

I recommend that the worker’s grievance on this issue as outlined in his correspondence to the employer on 24th April 2019 be dealt with as a matter of urgency in line with the agreed grievance procedures.

CA-00030692-001

Having considered the submissions of both parties, I do not recommend in the worker’s favour on this issue. However, I recommend that the protocol of engagement be agreed with the worker and finalised within four weeks of the date of this recommendation.

CA-00030692-002

On this issue, I recommend that the employer completes the grievance process within six weeks of the date of this recommendation.

Grievance Procedures, Acting Up, Bullying and Harassment complaint