Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A Health Worker

A Health Service

Representatives

Shonagh Byrne SIPTU

Emily Mahon

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 - 00001506

04/07/2023

The Worker commenced employment with the Employer in 2013. She works 39 hours per week and her gross annual salary is circa €38,000.

The Worker lodged a formal complaint under the Dignity at Work policy against her line manager on 13 April 2021.   Preliminary screening of the complaint resulted in a recommendation that it go to mediation.  However, the Worker declined mediation as her view was that the matter was not appropriate for mediation due to the seriousness of her allegation.  The matter was referred to the WRC in July 2021.

There was some communication between the Worker and the Employer regarding an investigation.  A WRC hearing took place on 20 June 2022 which was adjourned to allow the Employer to organise and conclude the investigation into the Worker’s complaint. The Employer was given a period of three months by the Adjudication Officer to conclude the process. The Worker’s union were proactive in their correspondence with the Employer in the following months, continually looking for updates.  Despite this, progress waws slow.

A second WRC hearing took place on 24 March 2023, at which it was agreed to adjourn to allow the investigation report to be issued.  The final report was eventually issued on 4 July 2023.

The worker submits that the employer’s Dignity at Work includes the following: “the investigation process is designed to deal with complaints promptly, with the minimum of distress for the parties involved, using fair procedures which uphold the rights of all parties”

In concluding, the Worker submits that she lodged a serious complaint in relation to incidents of sexual harassment to her employer on 13 April 2023.  It took over 27 months for the investigation to conclude. The investigation only commenced one year after the original complaint was lodged and it took a further year for the Worker to receive the final report.  It is unacceptable that the complaint took such a long time to process and conclude. The delay was in breach of the Dignity at Work policy and the principles of fair procedures and natural justice. The Worker is looking for an award of compensation for the delay in processing and concluding her complaint as justice delayed was justice denied in this case.

The Employer submits that following the submission of the Worker’s complaint on 13 April 2021, actions were taken to assist in reducing the potential for contact between the Worker who had made the complaint and the person against whom the complaint had been made.

In May 2021, the Employer suffered a major ransomware cyber-attack which greatly diminished its ability to carry on normal operations and much stored data was lost.

The complaint was referred to the Employer’s Investigation Unit in May 2021.  A general instruction regarding IR operations during covid, the rising number of Covid cases in the summer of 2021, allied to the redeployment of staff, made it difficult to process normal IR matters, including investigations.

Due to the pandemic, it was not until June 2022, that the Employer assigned an Investigator to the complaint.  A draft report was near completion in January 2023, when, unfortunately, the Investigator became extremely unwell and the report was not available to any party. 

The Employer submits that due to restrictions in place from March 2020 up to March 2022, there was a significant backload in cases and workload for the Internal Investigations Unit. The Employer had implemented protective measures from the initial stages of the process until the final report was issued.

In conclusion, the Employer submits that the Worker has failed to take due cognisance of the impact of the pandemic on the Employer’s ability to get this process up and running and the illness of the Investigator and the effect this had on the completion of the final report.  Time must be given to ensure that investigations are carried out thoroughly and accurately.

The Employer believes they complied with their Dignity at Work Policy by implementing protective measures, once management became aware of the complaint, and provided ongoing supports to the Worker. They also submit that they did the best they could to keep the Worker informed on developments.

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

While agreeing that investigations must be accurate and thorough, 27 months for a workplace investigation to conclude is unacceptable.  Taking so long to reach and issue an outcome, is unfair, on both the complainant and the person against whom the complaint was made. 

In recognition of the inordinate delays taken in processing and reaching a conclusion I believe monetary compensation is warranted.