ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00048721
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Stacey Moloney | Dún Laoghaire County Council |
Representatives | Not represented | Local Government Management Agency |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00059853-001 | 07/11/2023 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 17/04/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Procedure:
In accordance with section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 - 2015, this complaint was assigned to me by the Director General. I conducted a hearing on April 17th 2024, at which I made enquiries and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence relevant to the complaint. The complainant, Ms Stacey Moloney attended the hearing with her husband, Mr Brian Murphy. Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council was represented by Mr Keith Ervine of the Local Government Management Agency and he was accompanied by Ms Niamh Drain of the Council’s HR Department.
While the parties are named in this document, from here on, I will refer to Ms Moloney as “the complainant” and to Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council as “the respondent.”
Background:
On behalf of the respondent, TTM Healthcare (TTM) was awarded a services contract at a temporary refugee centre in Dublin 18. The complainant commenced employment with TTM on June 27th 2022 and was assigned to a role in the refugee centre. In November, she was promoted to the position of deputy manager. On September 15th 2023, she informed TTM that she no longer wanted to work at the refugee centre and, about two weeks later, she was appointed to a different site. The complainant submitted that she was constructively dismissed by the respondent, because she left her job in the refugee centre due to the conduct of the manager. In October 2023, the manager, who had been employed by TTM, moved to work with the respondent. |
Findings and Conclusions:
From the evidence submitted by the complainant at the hearing, it is apparent that she remains in employment with TTM Healthcare and that she was not dismissed. She was out of work for two weeks because she no longer wanted to work with the manager of the refugee centre where she was the deputy manager. This is the basis for her claim that she was constructively dismissed. It is evident that the complainant remains an employee of TTM and that she was not constructively dismissed. It is evident also that she has a grievance and that she is unhappy with how her employer managed her grievance. Having read the narrative on the complaint form submitted by the complainant, and, having conducted some initial enquiries, I am satisfied that the complainant has a grievance regarding how she was treated by a manager in August and September 2023 and that her complaint of constructive dismissal is misconceived. |
Decision:
Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the unfair dismissal claim consisting of a grant of redress in accordance with section 7 of the 1977 Act.
The complainant remains an employee of TTM Healthcare. I am satisfied that she was not constructively dismissed by the respondent, and, for these reasons, I decided that her complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act is not well founded. |
Dated: 02/05/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Key Words:
Constructive dismissal |