ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00023652
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Health Worker | A Health Body |
Representatives | No Appearance by or on behalf of the Worker | No Appearance by or on behalf of the Employer |
Complaint(s):
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-00030423-001 | 20/08/2019 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00030289-003 | 15/08/2019 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00030289-004 | 15/08/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 10/11/2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969, following 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:
This matter was heard in private by way of Remote Hearings pursuant to Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and SI 359/2020, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. This case commenced during August 2019, when the Worker in the case submitted a number of disputes to the WRC as a Lay Litigant under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The issues incorporated concerns on working relationships and working space. On 28 August 2019, the Employer in the case, was placed on notice of the dispute and asked if they wished to object within 21 days. On 30 September 2019, the WRC informed the Worker that the Employer had not responded, and the claims would proceed to hearing. On 30 September 2021, both parties were invited to attend a hearing in the case set down for 10 November 2021 at 12 noon. The Hearing progressed as planned, yet neither party attended the hearing. I was concerned that as the parties were identified as participants in the Irish Health Service, which is actively combatting a national pandemic, I thought it best to follow up directly with the parties. I did this within the 5-day window. I offered the Worker an opportunity for a resumed hearing and copied this to the Employer. I think that it is useful if I share a copy of that letter for the purposes of this document as it will explain the next occurrence. I am the Adjudication Officer assigned to hear your complaints lodged with the WRC in August 2019.
A hearing was set for these matters for 12 noon on November 10, 2021. I opened the hearing in private and there was no appearance by either party to the Dispute.
I am conscious that some time has passed since these matters were lodged at the WRC. In our preparation for hearing, Mr Hoey contacted your phone number recorded on the complaint form and received no response or facility for a message. This number did not connect with ours.
I would be grateful if you could inform me whether you intend to continue with this case within a 5-day period i.e., on or before Friday 19 November 2021.
If I receive your confirmation of intention to progress the case, I am mindful to resume the hearing at our earliest possible opportunity.
If I do not hear from you within the 5 days, you will appreciate that I will need to record “a no appearance “outcome in the case and share that with the parties.
I will copy this letter to the named employer in this case.
Thank You,
Yours sincerely,
Patsy Doyle, Adjudicator.
I did not receive a response from either party. Later that week, I received a notification from our Post Registration Unit, who had received a call from the named Manager recorded as a Contact on the Workers complaint form. I was informed that the worker was deceased and the Manager herself was leaving the service.
I have reflected on these details. I have not received official notification of the workers death; however, I have no reason to question the nature of the information shared with the PRU Dept and I have accepted it to be true.
I have revisited the complaint forms lodged in this case and note that they did not reflect a Human Resource Dept contact name as the Employer representative. The Complaint form did however clearly name the Employer. I believe that this should have generated Human Resource input much sooner in the case.
I am obliged to bring this case to completion at first instance. I intend to address the matter as sensitively as possible. |
Summary of Workers ’s Case:
The Worker submitted a number of disputes to the WRC during August 2019. CA-0030423-001 The Worker submitted that her working relationships were uncomfortable CA-0030289-003 The Worker submitted that she was experiencing difficulties in her work office through working relations and working space CA-0030289-004 The Worker submitted that she had experienced a difficulty with her Line Manager. The Worker had attached some past decisions from both the WRC Adjudication Service and the Labour Court under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 from 2018/2019.
|
Summary of Employer’s Case:
There was no response to the Workers claims .CA-0030423-001, CA-0030289-003 and CA-0030289-004. There was no attendance by or on behalf of the Employer at hearing. There was no response to the copy of the letter I sent to the Worker in the case. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-0030423-001 My role as an Adjudicator is governed by Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. I am obliged to investigate any trade dispute referred and to make a recommendation in the case.
As I have set out, I understand that a supervening event has occurred in this case, where the Worker in the case appears to have died prior to the Investigation of her disputes.
I am disappointed that these disputes did not prompt the intervention of the Human Resource Dept at a much earlier stage. I note that the Employer did not object to the claims in August 2019. That suggests that they were on clear notice of the claims for a two-year period.
It is regrettable that the case was scheduled for hearing for two parties when it was clear that the Employer knew that the Worker was deceased. I would have been appreciative to have learned of this development prior to hearing. I am unsure as to when the worker passed away.
CA-0030289-003 My role as an Adjudicator is governed by Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. I am obliged to investigate any trade dispute referred and to make a recommendation in the case.
As I have set out, I understand that a supervening event has occurred in this case, where the Worker in the case appears to have died prior to the Investigation of her disputes.
I am disappointed that these disputes did not prompt the intervention of the Human Resource Dept at a much earlier stage. I note that the Employer did not object to the claims in August 2019. That suggests that they were on clear notice of the claims for a two-year period.
It is regrettable that the case was scheduled for hearing for two parties when it was clear that the Employer knew that the Worker was deceased. I would have been appreciative to have learned of this development prior to hearing. I am unsure as to when the worker passed away.
CA-0030289-004
My role as an Adjudicator is governed by Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. I am obliged to investigate any trade dispute referred and to make a recommendation in the case.
As I have set out, I understand that a supervening event has occurred in this case, where the Worker in the case appears to have died prior to the Investigation of her disputes.
I am disappointed that these disputes did not prompt the intervention of the Human Resource Dept at a much earlier stage. I note that the Employer did not object to the claims in August 2019. That suggests that they were on clear notice of the claims for a two-year period.
It is regrettable that the case was scheduled for hearing for two parties when it was clear that the Employer knew that the Worker was deceased. I would have been appreciative to have learned of this development prior to hearing. I am unsure as to when the worker passed away.
|
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute. CA-00030423-001 I have respect for the sensitivities attached to this case. I prepared for and conducted a hearing in private this case on November 10, 2021. I recorded a “no appearance “by either party to the claim. I followed this up and offered the worker an opportunity to present her case. I subsequently learned that the Worker was deceased. The Employer did not engage with the claims. I am hopeful that the Employer will reflect on this omission. As the Worker is deceased, I cannot find merit in the case or make a Recommendation. CA-0030289-003 I have respect for the sensitivities attached to this case. I prepared for and conducted a hearing in private this case on November 10, 2021. I recorded a “no appearance “by either party to the claim. I followed this up and offered the worker an opportunity to present her case. I subsequently learned that the Worker was deceased. The Employer did not engage with the claims. I am hopeful that the Employer will reflect on this omission. As the Worker is deceased, I cannot find merit in the case or make a Recommendation. CA-0030289-004 I have respect for the sensitivities attached to this case. I prepared for and conducted a hearing in private this case on November 10, 2021. I recorded a “no appearance “by either party to the claim. I followed this up and offered the worker an opportunity to present her case. I subsequently learned that the Worker was deceased. The Employer did not engage with the claims. I am hopeful that the Employer will reflect on this omission. As the Worker is deceased, I cannot find merit in the case or make a Recommendation.
|
Dated: 02nd December 2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle
Key Words:
Working Relationships, No Appearance by or on behalf of either party. |