Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A Caretaker

A Secondary School

Representatives

Forsa Trade Union

Clare Bruton BL instructed by  Mason Hayes and Curran

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 - 00000350

08/06/2022

The worker submitted that the employer failed to appropriately consult with staff and failed to identify an alternative role for him.

The worker commenced employment on 12 June 2017 and his position was terminated on 17 December 2021.  The worker submitted that the school did not engage with staff in accordance with TUPE. The employer failed to engage in meaningful engagement with the worker and failed to identify an alternative role for him in a timely manner.

The employer submits that they raised an objection to the dispute and that the dispute should not, therefore, proceed.  It was submitted that the school did not receive the letter from the WRC until 8th August 2022 when the school reopened after the summer holidays and that employer responded 3 days later on 12th august 2022 that they objected to the investigation of the dispute.

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

I note that the dispute was received by the WRC on 8th June 2022 and a letter dated 12 July 2022 was issued to the employer setting out:

              Trade Dispute Investigation

In so far as the request for an investigation by a Workplace Relations Commission Adjudicator under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969, into the above trade dispute is concerned, please note that under Section 36(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1990, any party has the right to object to an investigation of this dispute by an Adjudication Officer. 

Please indicate whether you wish to object to an investigation by an Adjudication Officer by completing the enclosed form and returning it to Information and Customer Services, Workplace Relations Commission, O’Brien Road, Carlow, R93 E92O within 21 days of the date of this letter.

And a further document that was also sent to the employer set out

              Please tick one of the following options:

              I object to an investigation of the above dispute by an Adjudication Officer

              I do not object to an investigation of the above dispute by an Adjudication Officer

By email dated 12 August 2022 the employer advised the WRC that they “object to an investigation of the above dispute by an Adjudication Officer”. 

The Act provides for

              Objections and appeals.

36.—(1) An objection under section 13 (3) (b) (ii) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, by a party to a trade dispute to an investigation of the dispute by a rights commissioner shall be of no effect unless it is notified in writing to the commissioner within three weeks after notice of the reference of the dispute to the commissioner has been sent by post to that party.

The employer failed to notify the commissioner within “three weeks after notice of the reference of the dispute to the commissioner has been sent” of their objection to an investigation of the dispute and therefore, the worker’s dispute may proceed.

I note the worker’s submission that there was lack of meaningful consultation and failure to allow the worker representation and failure to review alternative posts with the worker in a timely manner.  The employer submits that appropriate procedures were followed.  In all the circumstances I find that the employer could have engaged in a more thorough consultation including looking at alternative work for the worker.  Due to the unique circumstances of this dispute, I award the worker €525.

Due to the unique circumstances of this dispute, I award the worker €525.

Industrial relations act, objection