ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00044395
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Childcare Worker | A Childcare Provider |
Representatives | P. O'Connor and Sons Solicitors | Ronan Daly Jermyn Solicitors |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 | CA-00055251 | 23/02/2023 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/06/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Andrew Heavey
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969following 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 submissions relevant to the dispute.
Background:
The employee was employed by the employer from 21st March 2022 until 24th June 2022. The dispute arises as a result of a reference/questionnaire that was completed by the employer in relation to a job application submitted by the employee to a third party. The employee stated that the offer of employment was subsequently withdrawn as a result of the reference/questionnaire and that she has not been provided with a copy of the document. |
Summary of Employee’s Case:
The employee stated that two references were provided to a third party in relation to a job application she had submitted. There were no issues with one of the references but that the employee was not provided with a copy of the reference from her employer and the job offer was subsequently withdrawn. The employee stated that the employer did not retain a copy of the reference/questionnaire and she is not aware what was included in the document. This has caused great upset to the employee as she feels that whatever is contained in the reference will also affect other job applications in the future. The employee stated that she is extremely distressed as a result and is seeking an unredacted copy of the document in question. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The employer contends that the reference/ questionnaire was completed in good faith and returned to the organisation that had sought its completion. The employer is of the view that if the employee was unsuccessful in her job application with her prospective employer, then that is a matter for the employee to address with that organisation. In respect of the reference/questionnaire, the employer stated that it had been completed on a tablet and had been returned to the prospective employer once completed. The employer stated that it did not retain a copy as it did not wish to have confidential information available to be seen by other staff members. |
Findings and Conclusions:
It is not disputed that the reference/questionnaire is a document of the prospective employer which was completed by the employer who did not retain a copy for the reasons stated. Unfortunately, the employee had an offer of employment withdrawn on the basis that she was told that one of her references had let her down which she contends is the reference/questionnaire completed by her employer. In an attempt to assist in resolving the issue, it was suggested to the respondent at the adjudication hearing that at its next board meeting in August 2023, that the board would consider whether it would be in a position to clarify in writing to the third party organisation that it was in agreement to the reference/questionnaire being provided to the employee or at least that it had no objections to the release of the unredacted document to her. This may well have assisted in the employee confirming that there had been nothing negative said about her in the document and that the reasons for her not securing employment were not as a result of the document in question. In correspondence dated 29th September 2023, the employer’s representative confirmed that the board had considered the suggested options but had decided that it was not in a position to accede to the request as it was not in the interests of the organisation to do so. The respondent did confirm that it has no objection to speaking with a representative of the third-party employer to clear up any misunderstanding that may exist in relation to the reference. I note the response of the employer’s representative in relation to the interests of the employer, however, in considering this issue, and in making a recommendation, I must also consider the interests of the employee. From the employee’s perspective she is concerned that there is something written about her in a reference/questionnaire provided to a prospective employer that resulted in the withdrawal of a job offer and which may negatively affect future job applications. I fully accept the anxiety that this has caused to the employee. Having considered the matter, I find that the only way that the employee will be able to move forward is if she receives a copy of the unredacted reference/questionnaire in question. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
In all of the circumstances of this dispute, I recommend that that the employer write to the third-party employer, confirming its consent for the release of the unredacted document to the employee as requested by her. |
Dated: 8th November 2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Andrew Heavey
Key Words:
reference, prospective employer, withdrawal of job offer |