Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Care Assistant/Supervisor

Care Service Provider

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-00030976-001

18/09/2019

The claimant set out a chronology of her career within the company, commencing as a Care Assistant on the 5th May 2018 and being promoted to as a trainee supervisor in December 2018. The claimant advised that she had an unblemished work record and contended that from May 2019, she was the subject of bullying and victimisation by management and the Board of Directors on a daily basis. She submitted that she was left with no alternative but to hand in her notice on the 20th June 2019. She stated her last day of work should have been the 4th.July 2019 but without any explanation the company brought forward her final day of employment to the 25th June 2019.

The claimant outlined the work pressure and demands made on her when she became a supervisor – she worked a 10-12 hour day and while out on calls was also expected to be in the office. She was never furnished with a contract of employment either in her position as Care Assistant or Trainee Supervisor. She stated that relations deteriorated when management changed in March 2019. On the 19th.June 2019, she rang in to say she had been delayed on a call and was summoned to a meeting with management the following day. The meeting was deferred because her child was ill and when she attended the meeting on the 20th June she was presented with a list of performance issues – she was told at they outset that management wanted her to step down and that she was not qualified to be in a supervisory role. The claimant was taken aback and was aware that her manager had signed off on her performance which was deemed satisfactory. It was submitted that over the next few days management reduced her hours from 70 hours a week to 14 hours per week. The claimant said that the hours had been decreasing steadily since April 2019.The claimant said the meeting was friendly, that she was unaware it was a disciplinary meeting and that they raised mental health challenges with her at the meeting. The claimant asserted that the company had breached confidentiality by raising her marital and mental health challenges in front of other staff. The claimant outlined the absence of training and responded to the list of performance issues that had been raised by the respondent. The claimant outlined the pressure that was put on her to attend to clients when her son was ill and the difficulties caused by the absence of cover. She said there was a build up to the events and she felt she was constructively dismissed. The claimant stated that she had sought a reference from management when she was examining alternative employment options. The claimant’s letter of resignation was submitted on the 20th.June 2019 and read :

“Due to circumstances beyond my control I wish to give you my resignation from the company. I have enjoyed working for you and the company. I wish you and everyone all the best in the future ..”The claimant said she felt bullied out of her job with the progressive reduction in hours and the bullying behaviour to which she had been subjected.

The respondent advised the WRC on the 12.12.2019 that they would not be attending the hearing.

I have reviewed the evidence presented at the hearing and taken account of the claimant’s submissions. I note that the claimant did not lodge a complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Acts in her complaint form and referred in the form to “Bullying and Harassment Procedures”.

On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant that she was never furnished with written terms and conditions of employment, that her hours were progressively reduced over a 4 month period prior to the termination of her employment, that she had no mechanism to process her grievances by virtue of the absence of a grievance procedure, that there were no bullying/harassment/dignity at work procedures in place and that she was not afforded her rights under natural justice when she was summoned to a meeting without notice that it was a disciplinary hearing and that the respondent had in advance of hearing what the claimant had to say had decided to request her to step down, that the claimant was unfairly treated by the respondent company and that there was an abject failure on their part to comply with the provisions of Si 146/2000. I recommend in full and final settlement of this complaint that the respondent pay the claimant €4,000 compensation for her unfair treatment and that the company familiarise themselves with the Codes of Practise of the WRC and the Health & Safety Authority with a view to ensuring compliance with best practise in their HR policies and procedures.