ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00000976
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Worker | A National Policing Employer |
Dispute(s):
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | IR - SC - 00000976 | 04/01/2023 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Date of Hearing: 20/06/2023
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended) following 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:
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. No. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The worker was out on sick leave and sought to have the sick leave discounted. He applied through the available mechanism but was unsuccessful in his application. The worker submitted that there was no procedure for him to appeal this decision and raised a dispute with the WRC. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The employer acknowledged that there was no written procedure to appeal the decision in relation to the worker’s sick leave request. However, it was noted that there was an appeals procedure in place and that this was explained to the worker. |
Conclusions:
In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties. The parties agreed that there was no written appeals procedure in place. It was noted that steps have been taken towards setting out an agreed written procedure regarding an appeals procedure. The workers representative sought to have matters decided at a level above the decision-maker, but the employer’s representative suggested that this may cause difficulties as there were relatively few staff members at a level above the decision-maker. Having considered matters, I am satisfied that the important issue is that the appeals decision-maker be independent of the initial decision and have all of the material upon which the original decision was based available to him or her. Having considered matters, I conclude that an early resolution of this matter would be preferable. It was agreed between the parties that a resolution of this matter within a six-week timeframe would be both desirable and possible. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I recommend that the Human Resources section contact the worker, in writing, outlining the appeal procedure currently in place.
I recommend that the worker engage with the appeal mechanism outlined by the HR section to process this appeal.
I recommend that the parties should work towards concluding withing six weeks of the date of this recommendation.
I recommend that the employer draft a written procedure for processing appeals in cases such as this and that the draft procedure be shared with the representative organisation with a view to agreeing a documented appeals policy in the very near future. This policy should adhere to the principles of fairness and natural justice.
Dated: 05-07-2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
IR Act – appeals procedure – recommended engagement with existing procedure – six-week timeframe - recommended written procedure be introduced. |