ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00035973

Parties:

	Worker	Employer
Anonymised Parties	A Nurse	A Veterinary Clinic

Representatives

N/A

Tiernan Lowey BL

Complaint(s):

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		24/02/2020
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969		24/02/2020

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 09/11/2021

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O’Neill

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969following the referral of the disputes to me by the Director General, I inquired into the disputes and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the disputes.

Specifically, I conducted a remote hearing in accordance with the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and Statutory Instrument 359/2020 which designates the Workplace Relations Commission as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.

Background:

The Worker referred two disputes for adjudication, namely that her manager relayed private information about her to work colleagues and also that she had been caused stress by the Employer’s Operations Director.

Summary of Worker’s Case:

The Worker stated that her manager relayed private information about her to her colleagues, both verbally & through Whatsapp thereby creating gossip and rumours. She also asserted that he discussed her position in the clinic with her work colleagues on several occasions, without raising it with her directly. She stated that because she felt she was being 'managed out' of her position and couldn't resolve this, she had no other option but to resign. She claimed that she later withdrew this resignation in an attempt to resolve the issues but to no avail. Specifically, the Worker sent an email outlining her resignation to the manager at 3.24pm and the manager informed all the staff in the clinic. She stated that by 4.10pm that day she received several messages from staff that he had told. Later that evening she received a screenshot from the group where the manager had announced her resignation to all. She stated that the Manager did not respond to her until the following evening at 8.47pm.

The Worker stated that all staff were very unhappy with their working conditions following a transfer of undertakings and called a meeting with management. She asserted that management asked that a spreadsheet of issues be given to them before the meeting.

The day before the meeting however, a group text was sent stating that due to the nature of the issues, the meeting would not be going ahead. The Employer stated that instead they would be meeting with the Worker in the instant case, who they suggested was the Clinic Manager, to discuss the issues. The Worker disputed that she was the Clinic Manager and stated that she was the Head Nurse and never been asked to be Clinic Manager. She stated that she had felt nauseous since that date, namely December 11th 2019. Subsequently on December 12th, the Director of Operations asked to meet with her but the Worker was not aware that she would be on her own.

The Worker claimed that the Director of Operations was very intimidating and aggressive in her tone with her during the meeting and belittled her implying that she was not able for the new role she was putting her into. She stated that she left the meeting close to tears and highlighted that the Director of Operations emailed after the meeting to say she would be in contact in 2 weeks about the role. She did not get back in contact with her however and the whole situation caused her a huge amount of stress. She stated that she attended her doctor who signed her off with work related stress as a direct consequence of

the treatment she had received from the Employer.

Summary of Employer’s Case:

The Employer’s representative highlighted that the Worker had not utilised the internal grievance procedures prior to referring the disputes to the Workplace Relations Commission.

Findings and Conclusions:

I note that the Worker did not utilise the Respondent’s internal grievance procedure in respect of this dispute and that the WRC should only be used as a last resort, where all internal procedures have been exhausted.

Decision:

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.

I cannot make a recommendation that is favourable to the Worker in respect of this dispute because she did not utilise the Respondent’s internal grievance procedure in the first instance.

Dated: 18th November 2021

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:

Key Words:

Failure to utilise internal procedures