ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00001446
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Worker | A Employer |
Dispute(s):
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 - 00001446 | 09/06/2023 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Date of Hearing: 13/12/2023
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended) following the referral of the dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any information relevant to the dispute(s).
Background:
The Worker worked for the Employer for 4 years. When she returned to work following protected leave she was told by someone that there had been conversations about her at management level. These conversations involved the CEO. She felt that the comments made regarding her were unprofessional and false. She emailed the CEO who responded with a copy of the company handbook offering for her to utilise the relevant policies and to meet with him. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The Worker had been on protected leave for a number of months. She was told at a work event, while she was on leave, that there had been negative conversations about her in the office. She discovered upon returning that people had essentially been warned about her. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The CEO received a complaint email from the Worker after she returned from protected leave. He likes the Worker and wanted her to stay in the company. He disputes the statements attributed to him by someone who reported these comments to the Worker. They are inaccurate. When she emailed him her complaint, he tried to engage with her and referred her to the Employer’s internal policies. He wanted to resolve these issues with her and for her to stay in the Company. |
Conclusions:
In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.
There was a dispute between the Worker and the CEO of the Employer. This involved allegations that the CEO had made negative comments about the Worker. The Worker raised these and was referred to the internal grievance policy. Her response was I have reviewed the grievance procedure in the handbook attached, which states my grievance will be dealt with by my supervisor in the first instance and senior management thereafter should the matter not be resolved. However, as you are both my supervisor and the most senior management in the company and part of my grievance is in relation to you having inappropriate conversations about me with other staff members, I don't see how I could engage with you regarding my complaint and there is no alternative. The CEO tried to engage with and meet the Worker but he didn’t offer a solution to the above problem. She resigned soon after. The Worker has pointed out an obvious issue with the Employer’s policy. A formal grievance with the CEO cannot be independently resolved via the policy, particularly when it involves a dispute as to what occurred and would require findings of fact. The policy simply does not provide for this scenario. It would have been appropriate for the policy to allow for a member of the board, or an independent external person be appointed to consider the grievance. Even if that option wasn’t there in the policy the CEO should have offered it to her when she raised the above point. While I believe the Worker resigned too quickly and should have tried to engage further, the lack of a policy option to resolve her dispute contributed to the break down in the relationship. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I recommend that the Employer pay the Worker €2000 in compensation.
Dated: 2nd May 2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Key Words:
|