ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00035986
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | Accounts Manager | Construction Company |
Representatives |
|
|
Disputes:
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-00041350-002 | 01/12/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 06/09/2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marie Flynn
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969following 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 information relevant to the dispute.
Background:
The Worker has been employed as an Accounts Manager by the Employer since 1st January 2015. The Worker works a 39 hour week and is paid €865.38 gross per week. |
Summary of Worker’s Case:
The Worker submits that on 16th November 2020 she received a very aggressive, abusive and threatening email from the Employer’s Technical Manager. In this email, the Technical Manager alleged that the Worker had engaged in behaviour that amounted to disrespect and insubordination and which led a toxic work culture. The Technical Manager also alleged that the Worker had bullied a colleague. The Worker had never met the Technical Manager who was a new colleague. On foot of the email, the Worker wrote to the Managing Director later the same day and demanded an unreserved apology for the accusation of bullying and for the accusation that she had created a toxic work culture. On 20th November 2020, the Managing Director emailed the Worker to say that before he could respond to her correspondence, he needed her to let him know how many other companies she was working with in addition to her fulltime position with the Employer. The Worker responded to this email on 22nd November 2020 and furnished the Managing Director with the information he required in relation to her other work which she believed he was fully aware of. The Employer responded on 23rd November 2020 seeking the following information: · The Worker’s home address · The date she started working for the Employer · Her current annual salary · Details of her company pension · Details of her company insurance The Worker responded later the same day and provided the requested information. The Managing Director then wrote to the Worker on 24th November 2020, to say that the Technical Manager was the only person who could talk to him going forward. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the adjudication hearing. I am satisfied that the Respondent was properly on notice of the time, date and location of the adjudication hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Under the heading “Grievance Procedure”, the Worker’s Statement of Terms and Conditions of Employment provides as follows: “It is important the if you feel dissatisfied with any matter relating to your work you should have an immediate means by which such a grievance can be aired and resolved. If you feel aggrieved at any such matter during the course of your employment you should raise the grievance with [the Managing Director] or a nominated independent person either verbally or in writing.” When the Worker felt aggrieved about the behaviour of the Technical Manager towards her, she acted in accordance with the provisions of her Statement of Terms and Conditions and raised the matter with the Managing Director. The Managing Director did not address the Worker’s grievance. Instead, he directed the Worker back to the very person about whom she had raised a grievance. In Geoghegan T/A Taps v a Worker INT 1014 the Labour Court held that “The Court is not prepared to insert itself into the procedural process in a situation where the dispute procedures have been bypassed.” It is well established by the Workplace Relations Commission and the Labour Court that they do not intervene in a dispute under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 until all internal grievance procedures have been fully exhausted. In this case, the Worker tried to raise a grievance in line with the Employer’s procedures but to no avail. I am of the view, therefore, that the Worker has initiated the Employer’s internal dispute procedures and that her grievances have not been properly addressed. Accordingly, I recommend in favour of the Worker. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I recommend that the Employer pay the Worker compensation of €5,000. |
Dated: 26th November 2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marie Flynn
Key Words:
IR – not possible to address grievance through internal procedures |