Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

Assistant Bar Manager

Leisure Centre

Representatives

  Michael Doughen

 Did not attend.

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 - 00003251

08/10/2024

The worker has referred a dispute alleging unfair treatment by the employer.

She has been employed in the Centre since 15/08/2018. She was appointed to the role of Assistant Bar Manager in August 2023, ensuring the smooth functioning of the bar, providing rosters for staff, and managing cash reconciliations.

She works 30 hours a week and is paid a gross hourly rate of €17.50.

She referred her dispute to the WRC on 8/10/2024.

The worker’s dispute centres on the following matters:

The unilateral reduction in her hours from 40-25 which occurred in July 2024. This change in her working hours was relayed to her via the roster. She received no other notification;

The vacant Bar Manager’s position   was not advertised internally, and an external candidate was hired;

The refusal of the bar manger to collaborate with her on the roster for staff in October 2024;

 A change in her working days;

Suspension with pay on the 7/10/2024.

The most serious matter was the arbitrary and summary suspension of her on Monday the 7/10/2024, without any stated reason or without notice, when the chairman of the Centre phoned her and told her not to come into work that night. The new Bar Manager in the same call added that she was suspended with pay and that she was not to enter the premises.

 On the 2/11/2024, she received a copy of a letter sent by the Bar Manager to the Chairman recommending her instant dismissal.

After the referral of this dispute to the WRC, the suspension was rescinded on 3/11/24 and the Chairman proffered an apology.

The employer though notified of the date and time of the hearing failed to attend.

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

The worker advised that there was no grievance procedure in the workplace.

She wrote to the Chairperson of the Centre on 19/12/2023 complaining about an attempt to reduce her working hours. She got no response.

She wrote again in July 2024 about the failure to advertise the vacant Bar Manager’s position. She received no response.

The worker referred to what she termed instances of bullying but did not bring these to the attention of the employer prior to submitting them to the WRC as required by the Act of 1969.

From the worker’s perspective, her primary focus at the hearing was the summary and arbitrary suspension and the prohibition of her accessing the employer’s premises without any reason for same being provided to her in advance of applying this sanction. When she asked in the telephone call of 7/10/24, why she was being suspended, both the Chairman and Bar Manager stated that they were not obliged to tell her. When she asked about the length of the suspension, the Chairman said that that depended on an investigation.

After the referral of this dispute to the WRC, the suspension was rescinded on 3/11/24.

Requirement for Fair procedures.

 In the absence of a disciplinary procedure in the workplace, the operative document governing such workplace procedures is S.1 146/2000. The General Principles contained in this statutory instrument provide as follows:

” The essential elements of any procedure for dealing with grievance and disciplinary issues are that they be rational and fair, that the basis for disciplinary action is clear, that the range of penalties that can be imposed is well-defined and that an internal appeal mechanism is available.”

The General Principles of S.I at section 6 provide that:

Details of any allegations or complaints are put to the employee concerned;

That the employee concerned is given the opportunity to respond fully to any such allegations or complaints;

That the employee concerned us given the opportunity to avail of the right to be represented during the procedure;

That the employee concerned has the right to a fair and impartial determination of the issues concerned, taking into account any representations made by, or on behalf of, the employee and any other relevant or appropriate factors or circumstances.

The submissions clearly show that the process employed to sanction and suspend the worker failed to meet any of the requirements of S.I 146/2000, was devoid of fairness and demonstrated contempt for the principles of natural justice.

I recommend that the employer provides a Grievance Procedure for employees.

I recommend that the employer provides a Dignity at Work Policy for employees.

I recommend that then employer restores the worker to her long-standing working hours and makes good the loss attendant on any reduction in her hours.

Notwithstanding that the employer rescinded the suspension with an apology on 3/11/2024, the employee was summarily suspended for a period of almost 4 weeks before being  offered any mechanism to appeal or reverse this decision.

 I recommend that the employer pay the employee the sum of €4200 for the needless distress caused to her and the grave breach of her fundamental right to disciplinary processes informed by the principles of natural justice.

Arbitrary sanctions. Absence of consultation concerning working conditions.