Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Clinical Nurse Specialist

Health service provider

Representatives

Psychiatric Nurses Association

Employee Relations Section of Employer

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-00032509-001

27/11/2019

The facts of this referral date back to 2019. The PNA/INMO served notice of planned industrial action on 10 January 2019 which was to commence on 31 January 2019.

The Employer's senior management team met with the PNA to agree parameters of engagement to deal with any issues as they arose due to the proposed industrial action.

The Employee as a regional representative was to attend affected Healthcare Units daily and liaise with the local general manager.

An issue arose on 12 July 2019 between the Employee and a CNM3 on the Employer’s staff.

The Employee's case is that a CNM3 on the Employer’s staff refused to cooperate with him to establish if there were sufficient staff on duty to staff a given Unit.

The Employee phoned the Area Director of Nursing to inform her of the CNM3’s non-cooperation.

Following the telephone call, the CNM3 approached the Employee adopting an aggressive/intimidatory tone/dance stating she did cooperate.  The CNM3 continued raising her voice, glaring at the Employee and continued her verbal assault.

The Employee reported the incident to the Assistant Director of Nursing and on the 14 July 2019 he made a complaint under the grievance policy as to the behaviour of the CNM3 towards him.

On 17 July 2019 the CNM3 made a complaint under the Dignity at Work policy against the Employee.

On the 27 September 2019, the Employee was made aware of the complaint and the preliminary screening of the CNM3’s complaint. The screening determined that the CNM3’s complaint fell under the Dignity at Work policy and identified bullying as the issue of concern.

The Employee submitted that the screening of the CNM3’s complaint was erroneously founded on the belief that it fell within the definition of bullying. He submitted that given that it was an alleged isolated incident it was not in line with the nationally agreed definition of bullying and it should not have been accepted as a valid complaint. He submitted that the Employer was attempting to widen the scope of the Dignity at Work policy and unilaterally change the policy without the agreed national parameters of policy review.

He denied he engaged in bullying and submitted that at all times he conducted his affairs in an appropriate and dignified manner.

By way of background information,  it was explained that the CNM3 had previously made a complaint to the Employee’s Union that was not upheld. He submitted that the complainant was part of a wider campaign to discredit his personal/professional reputation.

The Employer accepted that a determination of a preliminary screening report issued on 25 September 2019. The complaint as lodged was deemed to come within the scope of the Dignity at Work policy.

No parties associated with the matter sought to invoke the Grievance Procedures thereafter.

The Dignity at Work policy is a collectively agreed document.

The preliminary screening was conducted in full compliance with the terms, provisions and timeframes as outlined in the policy.

No findings of fact or determination as to whether the alleged behaviour occurred were made.

The Dignity at Work policy does not provide an appeals’ process in respect of the determination of a preliminary screening report. The employer referred to ADJ-00005666 which determined a similar complaint / referral to the WRC in 2017.

The Employer was satisfied that it acted in accordance with and in compliance with the terms of the Dignity at Work policy.

The Employer submitted that as the Employee has not brought a Grievance in relation to this complaint, the internal resolution processes of the Employer were not invoked, utilised or exhausted.

In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.

I find that the Employer has agreed structures in place with its Employee’s to address allegations of bullying.

In this case the Employee is attempting to appeal the findings of the Screening Committee.

The Dignity at Work Policy does not provide an appeals’ process in respect of the preliminary screening.

I have not been provided with any grounds to depart from the finding of ADJ-00005666.

Dignity at Work policy.  Appeal findings of Screening committee