Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A shop assistant

A pharmacy

Representatives

  Self

Pat Barriscale BL instructed by  Browne & Murphy LLP

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

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

08/09/2021

The Worker commenced her employment with the Employer on 1st September 2019 as a Shop Assistant. She worked 39 hours a week and was paid €420 gross weekly. Her employment terminated on 9th July 2019.

The Worker referred the within dispute to the Director General of the WRC on 8th September 2021 alleging that she was forced to resign while on illness benefit. 

The Worker submits as follows.

With respect to the matter of time limits raised by the Employer, the Worker submits that she was at a disadvantage as she could not afford a solicitor. She understands that under a different act her complaint would have been out of time. However, she knows that under the Industrial Relations Acts there are no time limits. Regarding the reasons for delay, the Worker explained that she was suffering from depression and was not able to work. She was also pregnant at the time. She did not realise at the time that she had been badly treated.

On 13th May 2019, the Worker was at work but she did not feel good as her depression and anxiety had come back. The Worker was 6 weeks pregnant at the time. The Worker asked her boss, Mr P if she could go home as she didn’t feel well mentally. He said no problem. The Worker went to her doctor later that evening. The Worker submits that the doctor recommended that she take some time off work. The Worker informed her boss straight after she left the doctor, and his response was “no problem, don’t worry take as much time as you want off”.

The Worker submits that Mr P rang her a week into her sick leave. He asked how she was and said to take as much time as she needed. During the next week, Mr P rang and asked the Worker when she would be back, and her response was that she didn’t know when she would be ok to go back, as one cannot put a time on depression and anxiety. He said that’s fine. The Worker submits that one week later, Mr P rang her again, asking when she would be coming back, and she gave the same response that she was not ready. The Worker submits that he informed her that she had to make a decision and proceeded to tell her that she would have to resign, because other employees needed holidays and she had to resign if she was not coming back to work. At this point the Worker felt under immense pressure. She was mentally ill, and her boss was putting so much pressure on her that is exacerbated her depression and anxiety. The Worker was also pregnant at that time, and she was attending the Perinatal Mental Health Centre, where the psychiatrist prescribed her antidepressants.

The Worker submits that she felt like she was cornered into resigning. She was not in the right mind to make a decision. She said that Mr P sent her a text saying that they needed to meet. He said it was about annual leave, but it wasn’t. She ended up meeting Mr P at a petrol station across from the workplace on 3rd July 2019. The Worker submits that they sat down, and he proceeded to tell her that she needed to resign. He had a piece of blank paper and a pen with him. He told the Worker that the employees in work were getting annoyed that she was still out sick, which the Worker felt was untrue because she had asked her co-workers and they had no issue with her being absent. Mr P then handed her the blank page and told her to write out her resignation. The Worker submits that she didn’t know what she was supposed to write, so Mr P told her what to write down and she signed it. She felt she was pressured into doing this. She was and remains mentally ill. She felt that the Employer took advantage of her mental health, she didn’t have an opportunity to seek advice.

The Worker submits that she attended mental health services. She wanted this problem to go away as it was causing her more and more stress.

The Worker submits that Mr P should not have made contact with her whatsoever. She had in total 4 or 5 phone calls from him. She was never asked to see the company doctor, which could have been done according to the company policy.

The Worker submits that she was forced into writing a resignation letter, she was told what to write on the piece of paper. All of this made her depression and anxiety much worse and made her pregnancy harder to the point where she had to take antidepressants. She was never late for work or never late back from lunch. She had been told that she was a great asset to the company. Looking back, the Worker realises how badly she was treated in the end.

The Worker confirmed that her parents, who were helping with childcare were moving to Spain. She noted that her partner’s parents also helped with childcare. However, she disagreed that her resignation was related to the childminding issues.

The Worker confirmed that she had suffered from depression since she was 17 and Mr P knew about it. She agreed that Mr P was concerned about her mental health and suggested that she takes as much time as she needed, but she was not happy about his phone calls.

It was put to the Worker that she asked the Employer to mislead a local authority in order for the Worker to get a council house. The Worker asserted that she had a great relationship with Mr P, and this case has nothing to do with the council house matter.

The Worker confirmed that she continued to get her medication from the Employer’s pharmacy for some 18 months after the termination of employment. She was asked why she did not move elsewhere if she felt she was not treated properly. She said that she was not in right mind. She said that she only went to the pharmacy once, it was her husband who would have picked up her medication.

The Worker was asked why did she expect the Employer to send her to the company doctor if the Employer knew she was unwell. She said that the Employer wanted her gone.

In relation to the text of 8th July 2019 asking “any update” the Worker said she didn’t understand what the text was about, perhaps about the keys. It was put to the Worker that the keys were dropped back on 16th May 2019. She said she did not recall what the text was about.

The Worker said that her baby was born in December 2019, and she started to come around and was getting annoyed over what had happened. She said that she lost out on maternity benefit because she resigned. She said that she is not ready to look for work and she remained on illness benefit for 2 years, she is now in receipt of invalidity pension. She is not considering going back to work any time soon.

The Employer submits as follows.

The Employer raises preliminary matter of time limits. The Worker, in her compliant form alleges that her former employment ended on 13th June 2019. Her application to the Workplace Relations Commission was received on 8th September 2021, two years and three months after the employment ended.

Pursuant to the Sections 41(6) and 41(8) Workplace Relations Act 2015 the Worker is well outside the six-month period referred to in Section 41 (6) and is also well outside the extended, further six months, specified in 41 (8). In all of the circumstances, the Employer submits that the complaint should not be considered at all by the Workplace Relations Commission. The Employer asserts that the matter should have been dealt with within a reasonable time and the Worker did not provide explanation for the delay. The Employer suggests that under the Industrial Relations Act similar provision apply to the Workplace Relations Act in terms of time limits.

Without prejudice to the foregoing, the Employer denies that the Worker was forced to resign her position with the company. In her complaint, the Worker states as follows: While on Illness Benefit I "felt " I was forced to resign my position in the Company (emphasis added). This was not the case. To support this position, the Employer exhibited numerous text/WhatsApp messages which passed between the Worker and Mr P, a principal within the Employer company between the dates of the 13th May 2019 and 14th December 2019. It can be clearly seen from these messages, no pressure whatsoever was brought to bear on the Worker in relation to her employment and the sole concern of the Employer was that she would look after her health first and foremost.

As far as the Worker’s statement is concerned, the Employer takes exception to the suggestion that Mr P dictated the resignation statement and got the Worker to sign it. There was a meeting at a petrol station, and it related to whether any holiday pay was due to the Worker. There was holiday pay due to the Worker and this was paid subsequently.

When the Worker was out on Illness Benefit, she already had one child and was expecting a second child. She made it clear to the Employer that, as her mother had moved to Spain, she would be having serious difficulties as far as childcare was concerned. This was her principal problem and not any pressure brought to bear on her by the Employer as far as forcing her to resign her position.

At the adjudication hearing, Mr P of the Employer said that he worked in psychiatric services and is very much aware of depression. He said he knew that the Worker wasn’t herself. They were friends. When he had his health issues, she would have helped, cooked dinners. He said that it was his job to support her. He said that he knew that she needed professional help on 13th May 2019, and he told her not to worry about work and to look after herself.

Mr P said that even after the Worker resigned, she would have come for a chat and he always told her that if she wanted to come back, her job was there for her. Mr P said that the Worker was very good at her job. In relation to the alleged shortages of staff and putting the Worker under pressure to come back, Mr. P said that the Employer had no staffing problem, had six staff member and two additional summer staff. Mr P said that the Worker told him she was going to resign as her mother left. Her mother-in-law did a bit of childminding, but the Worker was under stress over the childminding issue. He said that the Worker became very introverted, lost confidence and did not want to meet anyone.

on 3rd July 2019, the Worker told Mr P that she got the council house, and she did not think she would return, he never asked her to write a letter. He said that the letter is stamped 8th of July but it was actually received on 9th July 2019, the date on the stamp was not changed from the day before. Mr P said that the Worker was getting him a match program, she wanted to name her baby after him, it was not something you do when your boss is bullying you.

Mr P said that when the Worker told him on 3rd July 2019 that she would not return to work, he told her he would need something in writing. He then sent a text on 8th July 2019 saying, “any update”.  This was in relation to the Worker’s decision to resign and the letter she was to drop in.  Mr P said that it was the Worker who emailed HR asking for her P45.

I have carefully considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties in relation to this dispute.

This dispute was referred to the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and, in essence, concerns a claim of unfair dismissal.

The Worker commenced her employment with the Employer on 1st September 2018. Her employment terminated on 9th July 2019. The Worker referred her dispute to the WRC on 8th September 2021.

The Employer raised the matter of applicable time limits. I note that the Worker referred her dispute to the WRC over 2 years after the termination date. I also note that the Worker outlined her mental health difficulties that, she asserted, contributed to the delay. In that regard, I find that, unlike provisions within employment rights legislation, there is no stated statutory time limits that restrict a Worker from taking a claim under the Industrial Relations Act. 

The Worker alleges that she was forced to resign her position during a meeting with Mr P of the Employer on 3rd July 2019. The Employer disputes the Worker’s claim and contends that the Worker left the employment of her own volition.

Having carefully considered the parties’ submissions and the text messages exhibited by the Employer, I find that the Worker met with Mr P on 3rd June 2019. However, I do not accept that the Worker was forced to write a resignation letter during this meeting. The text message of 8th June 2019 exhibited at the hearing, the meaning of which the Worker was unable to recall, corroborates Mr P’s assertion that the Worker informed him that she did not wish to return to work, and she undertook to put it in writing. In that regard, I accept the Employer’s assertion that the Worker was asked for an update via text message on 8th July 2019 and she delivered her resignation letter on 9th July 2019. The text messages exhibited at the hearing demonstrate that the Worker remained in a friendly relationship with Mr P in the period post the termination of employment up until at least December 2019. There is nothing in the communication between the parties that would suggest that the Worker was asked to resign or had any concerns regarding the termination of her employment.

I do not recommend concession of the Worker’s claim in this dispute.

Termination of employment -resignation