Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A Nurse

A Hospital

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

CA-

22/02/2022

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

CA-

22/02/2022

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2015

CA-

28/06/2022

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 45 (A) of the industrial Relations Act 1946

CA-

28/06/2022

The Worker seeks a recommendation in relation to a disciplinary sanction , bullying and harassment procedures , Sectoral Employment Order (SEO) and Employment Regulation Order (ERO). Submissions were presented in advance and referred to at the hearing.

The Employer attended voluntarily and presented submissions at the hearing which had previously been exchanged with the Worker.

Disciplinary Sanction

It was the Worker’s submission that she was subjected to a disciplinary investigation following a complaint from a third-party 28 August 2021.

The Worker refused to attend a disciplinary hearing in person as she wanted to ensure transparency instead she agreed to compromise  and offered a remote hearing with a witness/advocate of her choice and a recording of the meeting. This was refused on the grounds of confidentiality. 

Bullying and Harassment Procedures

It was the Worker’s submission that she raised numerous complaints of bullying with HR and Management and requested that they acknowledge the bullying she was subjected to and assist her in resolving it.

Instead, of seeking to resolve it she was repeatedly requested to attend meetings behind closed doors. The Worker described this approach as lacking in empathy or flexibility, and they repeatedly quoted policy, procedure, and contractual obligations.

SEO

The Worker stated she was unfamiliar with SEO’s, and she was seeking redress in relation to wages.

ERO

The Worker stated she was unfamiliar with ERO’s, and she was seeking redress in relation to wages.

Disciplinary Sanction

The Employer furnished the letters, investigation, and disciplinary procedure in which it sent to the Employee following receipt of a complaint from a third party together with an investigation into  notes written on a patient record.

Following an investigation which was conducted in the absence of the Employee as she failed to attend the meetings, a sanction of a written warning which was appealed by the Worker. The Worker sought external third-party mediation before an appeal hearing was heard.

Bullying and Harassment Procedures

The Employer provided a first-hand account of the engagement by Assistant Director and HR Director with the Employee on the Grievance Policy.

It was submitted that the Employee failed to engage with the relevant procedure.

SEO

It was the Employer’s position that the Worker was not covered by a SEO.

ERO

It was the Employer’s position that the Worker was not covered by an ERO.

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

It is important to first set out the jurisdiction of the Workplace Relations Commission in investigating trade dispute which, after the parties have exhausted all internal procedures, is an appeal of a sanction or an outcome of an internal investigation.

The process is not concerned with determining the legal rights or duties of any person or employer. Noonan J. in Mullally  and Ors v Labour Court [2015] IEHC 351 held:-

“it is in the nature of an industrial relations forum which is designed to facilitate the mediation of trade disputes and offer an opinion as to how such a dispute may be resolved. Its recommendation has no strictly legal effect but rather relies upon the moral authority of the expert statutory body from which it emanates. It does not give rise to justiciable rights such as would permit the applicants to seek judicial review”

Disciplinary Sanction

The Worker was given every opportunity to engage with the disciplinary process. At each stage the meetings were rescheduled a number of times when the Worker decided not to attend. Alternative venues were also offered. 

I find given the subject matter of the complaints, it was entirely appropriate to have the meetings face to face particularly where the Worker was seeking to have a third party represent her, which was not provided for in the policy, nor would she agree to sign a confidentiality agreement. 

The Employer in this dispute made every accommodation for the Employee in line with the established Disciplinary Procedure.

It is further noted that despite submitted a detailed appeal letter the Employer decided not to proceed with the appeal hearing.

Therefore, I make no recommendation where the Worker herself decided not to engage with the procedure.

Bullying and Harassment Procedures

The Employee submitted detailed grievances to her Employer on a number of occasions. Numerous supports were offered to the Employee from management in line with the established Grievance Procedure. However, it is clear she chose not to engage with the Grievance Procedure which applies to all staff with the Employer.

Despite the Employee herself seeking referring numerous complaints of allegations of failure to comply with procedures against her Employer  , it is contradictory that when the Employer seeks to apply an agreed procedure with numerous stakeholders, she demands the procedure be tailored to her specific situation.

Therefore, I make no recommendation where the Worker herself decided not to engage with the procedure.

SEO

There has been nothing presented to establish there is a Sectoral Employment Order in place for the Worker’s sector.

ERO

There has been nothing presented to establish there is an Employment Regulation Order in place for the Worker’s sector.

ERO-SEO-Bullying and Harassment – Disciplinary Sanction - IR