Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A Worker

A Service Provider

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

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

CA-00032022-001

06/11/2019

The Worker referred a dispute to the WRC under the Industrial Relations Act alleging that her Employer failed to grant her a fair and impartial appeals process for her grievance which she states is in breach of the policies and procedures set down in the Staff handbook.

The Worker states that she has been employed as the Development Manager with the Employer for almost 18 years. The Worker is alleging that she has been subjected to bullying over the past year by the Regional Manager Ms. W. The Worker states that there is a clear conflict of interest in that the Regional Manager is seeking to influence the outcome of a complaint which is about her and the Board of the organisation is supporting and accommodating her involvement in this process while at the same time stating that they are impartial. The Worker contends that this involvement totally compromises the impartiality and independence of the Board and is not in line with the procedures outlined in the Staff Handbook. The Worker alleges that given that the Chair of the Board had involvement in the initial grievance, it is totally inappropriate to have said Chair hear the appeal and in this regard the Worker is very concerned that she is given a fair and impartial appeals process.    

The Employer states that the complaint referred to the WRC was under the grievance procedure and not bullying. The Employer states that the Worker declined mediation as was her right. The Employer states that the company appointed an external investigator, Company A to conduct the investigation into the Worker’s grievance. The Employer states that Company A was not “an agent of the Board” and the Chair of the Employer organisation did not investigate the complaint as the Worker has tried to claim. The Employer states that the Chair of the Board did not see the complaint and was not involved in the investigation process. The Employer states that the company offered the Worker an appeals process in line with the staff handbook which outlines that the Chair should hear such an appeal. The Employer states that the Chair was not involved in the details of the grievance. In conclusion the Employer states that as the Chair was not party to the details of the complaint, had not been involved in the process in any way, it is fair that the Chair should hear the appeal in line with the staff handbook.

I have reviewed the information presented at hearing and the written submissions received and I note the respective positions of each of the parties.

Based on the information provided and the perceived misgivings on behalf of the Worker in relation to the impartiality of the Chair in hearing her appeal, in all of the circumstances of the within dispute, I recommend that a Chairperson of a separate Board of the Employer organisation hear the appeal of the Worker’s grievance so as to allay her concerns and to ensure objectivity, transparency and fair procedures in line with best practice models. In this regard, the appeal mechanism as recommended should be commenced within 6 weeks of the date of this decision and completed in a timely manner.

Having carefully considered the within dispute, I recommend that a Chairperson of a separate Board of the Employer organisation hear the appeal of the Worker’s grievance so as to allay the her concerns and to ensure objectivity, transparency and fair procedures in line with best practice models. In this regard, the appeal mechanism as recommended should be commenced within 6 weeks of the date of this decision and completed in a timely manner.

Grievance, appeals process