Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Worker

Employer

Representatives

  Self

 Operations Manager

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-00031981-001

04/11/2019

This dispute is in relation to a complaint by the worker that her employer did not properly investigate and deal with an incident in the workplace which resulted in an injury to the worker.  The matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and S.I. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.

The worker was working in the employer’s packing department when she was struck by an object which was thrown by another unidentified employee.

The worker filled in an accident form and reported the matter to management.

The worker later felt unwell and went home.  The worker was subsequently on sick leave for 2 – 3 weeks.

There was an investigation but nothing happened and the worker still feels unsafe at work.  The worker referred the dispute to the WRC on 4 November 2019.

The employer accepts that there was an incident and that the worker suffered an injury.

The employer commenced an investigation within days of the incident but were unable to identify what precisely had occurred.

The employer referred the worker to an Occupational Health doctor.

The employer has been endeavouring to ascertain what the worker wants to happen.

The worker concerned has been employed by the employer since March 2007.  The employer has a workforce of about 90 employees.

The incident at the centre of the dispute took place on 15 October 2019.  The worker was engaged in the packing process when she felt something strike her head.  According to the worker she saw a paper ball made up of packing tape lying on the floor.  She filled in an accident form and reported the matter to management.  About an hour later she felt unwell and went home.  She attended hospital and was diagnosed with mild concussion.  The worker returned to work on 18 October when the employer commenced an investigation.  The worker again went out ill, was referred to an Occupational Health doctor and was subsequently absent on sick leave returning to work on 13 November.

The employer interviewed four members of staff who were present in the area where the incident happened.  The worker herself did not see who threw the paper ball and, of the other employees, only one reported seeing such a ball on that day but did not see it hitting the worker.  The report concluded that whilst it was evident that something did hurt the worker it was unclear what hit her or how it hit her.  The report noted that no action would be taken against any individual but that employees should be reminded of the importance of treating one another with respect in the workplace.  The hearing was informed that the employer has now put in place an employee assistance programme.

The employer also pointed out that the worker had not raised any grievance about the investigation or indeed any other matter through the company’s grievance procedure.  In this regard I note that the timeline of events in this matter.  The incident occurred on 15 October.  The worker returned to work briefly on 18 October when she was interviewed at the commencement of the investigation but then was out sick until 13 November.  Interviews of staff took place during this period with the final interview on 20 November.  A copy of the final report was given to the worker.  The worker submitted her dispute to the WRC on 4 November 2019.

It is clear from this timeline that the dispute was submitted to the WRC before the investigation had been completed.  The worker had not invoked the company’s Grievance Procedure in relation to this matter.  It has been a long-held principle that the referral of disputes under the Industrial Relations Act should only take place after local established procedures for dealing with grievances have been exhausted.  The Labour Court stated in INT 1014:

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

I therefore cannot make a recommendation in regard to this dispute.

As the established procedures for resolving disputes at local level have not been fully utilised in this matter I cannot issue a Recommendation and must refer the issue back to the parties concerned.

Industrial Relations Act 1969   Non-utilisation of Grievance Procedures