Employee

Employer

Anonymised Parties

Security Supervisor

Facilities Management Company

Representatives

Hugh Hegarty Management Support Services (Ireland) Ltd

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-00038185-001

22/06/2020

The employee was employed as a security supervisor with the employer.  She was assigned to “Location A”.  She submitted a grievance in later October 2019 in relation to an interaction with her manager.  The matter was investigated by the employer.  In September 2020 the employee raised the complaint again when she submitted her resignation letter to the employer.  The employee was not happy with how the employer dealt with her grievance and submitted her dispute to the WRC on 22/06/2020.

At the hearing the employee outlined a number of issues in relation to her previous employer.

(a)    On 29/10/2019 she submitted a grievance to the employer in relation to an incident involving her supervisor on 15/10/2019.  She had a meeting with a representative of the employer on 21/11/2019 but did not receive any feedback in relation to her grievance.

(b)    On 12/12/2019 there was a Private Security Authority (PSA) inspection in “Location A”.  Two months later the employee received a letter inviting her to a meeting to discuss alleged unsatisfactory standard of work.  This was followed by a disciplinary hearing.  There was no disciplinary sanction applied but the employee has a grievance about the fact that the allegations were withheld from her for two months and there was no HR presence at the investigation or disciplinary meetings.

(c)     Following this the employee wrote to HR in relation to the first incident and there was no follow up.  The employee sent this query by e mail on 28/02/2020.  The employee has a grievance in relation to the lack of any follow up in relation to this matter.

(d)    In April 2020 there was a further incident with the account manager was not listed on the emergency contact list.  The employee has a grievance in relation to how the communication in relation to this was done

(e)    In May 2020 there was a further incident while she was working in the control room.  There was another communication issue which involved her line manager.  She feels that the manager did not communicate appropriately with her.

(f)      There were two other incidents which the employee said, “made her feel bad and victimised”.  These incidents were related to issues with the roster and the communication which ensued.

The employee feels that she raised her grievances “many times” to various named managers but was never taken seriously. She spent 8 years working in “Location A” and loved her role and work there.  She felt that from October 2019 she received no support or did not have her grievances properly addressed. As a result of this the employee tendered her resignation from the employer on 01/09/2020.

The employee has submitted a claim to the WRC that the grievance she submitted against her manager in October 2019 was not investigated. The employer is clear that there was an indication conducted and the matter was resolved.  The employee never raised any concern about the outcome until about six months later. 

The employer told the hearing that on receipt of the grievance the matter was referred to an HR Advisor for investigation.  The employee was invited to an investigation meeting and attended one on 21/11/2019.  At the meeting the informal resolution of the issue was discussed.  There was no further contact by the employee in relation to this matter until September 2020.  On receipt of that e mail the HR Advisor contacted the employee and offered to reengage with the internal process and also confirmed that the employer would also be willing to move the employee to another site in order to resolve matters.  The employee declined the offer and subsequently tendered her resignation.

In relation to the other matters raised by the employee at the hearing it was submitted on behalf of the employer that none of these were ever raised through the internal grievance process. Some of the issues raised at the hearing are more appropriately deemed operational matters.  In that context the employee did not utilise or exhaust all the internal process before submitting the issues to the WRC. 

In summary, the employer’s representative outlined that the grievance raised by the employee was investigated and resolved.  If the employee was not satisfied, or had any concern in relation to the initial grievance, then she should have informed the employer.  She did not do so.  The employer cannot be faulted for not responding to any grievance that is not submitted.  The employee was in a supervisory position and was fully acquainted and trained in the employers’ policies and procedures.

In relation to the investigation and disciplinary hearings which arose from the PSA inspection, the employer submits that it is entitled to investigate any matters of concern and also to initiate disciplinary proceedings where this is warranted.  In any event there was no disciplinary action taken against the employee arising from this matter and the matter was concluded.   The employee failed to utilise the grievance procedure in relation to this matter.

It is clear that the employee feels aggrieved about various matters that arose during her last year of employment with the employer.  She feels that she did raise the issues with relevant managers at the time. Some of those issues are clearly operational matters and not appropriate for a grievance policy.

The delay in making the employee aware of the issues arising from the PSA inspection are regrettable but the employer must be credited with dealing with those through its policies and procedures.

The employee has now left the employer and at the hearing she confirmed that following her resignation she commenced working for the employer based in “Location A”. 

I note that on receipt of her letter of resignation the employer asked the employee to reconsider her decision and provided her with a copy of the grievance procedure and contact details of their EAP provider.

I note that the employee responded by stating “I don’t think meeting and discussing the matters that I have wold change something from my previous experience.”  In that context there was nothing further that the employer could do.

I also accept that many of the issues raised at the hearing were never formally raised with the employer.  As it is also almost one year since the employee submitter her complaint I am recommending that the employee now accepts that she had a final opportunity at the hearing to outline her concerns in relation to her now previous employer and that the matter is now closed.

I am recommending that the employee accepts that she had a final opportunity to outline all her concerns to her previous employer at the hearing and that the matter is now closed.  I am also recommending that the employer gives consideration in relation to how the outcome of a grievance is communicated to an employee.

Grievance procedure.