Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

Team Manager

Retailer

Representatives

Mandate Trade Union

 HR Manager

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 - 00000870

18/11/2022

The Worker works as a Team Manager with the Employer organisation.  Shas referred a dispute in relation to the outcome of her performance management review.

The Worker contends that the Employer did not follow its own procedures and policy in relation to her performance review.  The Worker contends that the outcome of her performance review was preordained which is contrary to how the process is supposed to take place.

The Employer’s performance management system is based on five skills.  If an employee achieves an “Outstanding” rating in respect of three or more skills, they are awarded a pay increase.

The Worker contends that her Line Manager downgraded her on the "Be One Team" skill from “Highly Effective” to “Effective” without performance managing her.  The Worker contends that she produced sufficient evidence during the performance management review to warrant a pay rise. The Worker further contends that at a "check in" meeting which took place one month before her performance review, she was told to keep up the good work by her Line Manager. 

The Worker contends that her Line Manager had a document on his iPad regarding her performance and that this document was only shared verbally with her on the day of her review.  The Worker contends that she was only issued with the Line Manager’s document three weeks after she requested it at her appeal meeting.

The Worker appealed the outcome of her performance review.   As part of the appeal, the then HR Manager interviewed the Worker and the Worker’s Line Manager.  On 5 September 2022, the Worker’s appeal was rejected. 

The Worker is seeking that her grading in respect of the “Be One Team” skill to be restored to “Highly Effective”.  In addition, the Worker seeks to engage in ongoing feedback with her Line Manager to enable her to prepare for her forthcoming performance review.

Performance reviews are conducted annually for Team Managers.  This involves a meeting taking place between the Team Manager and their Line Manager.  At this meeting both parties provide evidence under five skill areas and, after discussion, agree a rating for each area. In July 2022, the Worker had a performance review with her Line Manager. At this meeting, the Worker presented her evidence under the five areas, as did her Line Manager. The Worker was rated as follows:

Think Customer — Highly Effective

Passionate about Products — Highly Effective

Be One Team — Effective

Own your Own Part in Delivering Results — Outstanding

Be Honest Confident Listen and Learn — Highly Effective

The Worker did not agree with the rating of “Effective” for the “Be One Team” skill and expressed her disagreement with the rating to her Line Manager. In accordance with the process within the Employer organisation, the Worker appealed the outcome of the performance review to the then HR Manager.  The HR Manager met with both the Worker and her Line Manager.  Based on all the evidence presented, he concluded that the Worker did not meet the requirements for a higher grading and upheld the overall rating.  

The Employer contends that this matter has been fully investigated in accordance with its policy. The outcome of this investigation was to uphold the rating awarded to the Worker in her performance review.

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

Ongoing dialogue is a key component of effective performance management.  Formal review meetings are part of that ongoing dialogue.  Ideally, employees should not be surprised by the outcome of a review meeting and should be fully aware of the level of performance that is required to achieve each performance rating.  For whatever reason, that did not occur in this case and the Worker was surprised and upset by the outcome of her performance review. 

Having read the submissions of the parties and listened carefully to the oral submissions on the day, I recommend as follows:

I recommend that the Worker’s previous grading for “Be One Team” be restored to “Highly Effective”.

I also recommend that the Line Manager arranges a meeting with the Worker within one week of this hearing, to ensure that the Worker is fully aware of the steps she needs to take if she is aiming to achieve a rating of “Outstanding” in all areas.  The HR Manager will ensure that this meeting takes place.

Disputed performance review