FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : HSE SOUTH - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Disciplinary procedure.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns fifteen clerical staff employed by the HSE in the Community Care Centre in Waterford that refused, at the behest of the Union, to carry out work relating to the post of Telephonist / Switchboard Operator after the holder of that post retired. Management responded by invoking the disciplinary procedure on some of the staff involved. The Union argues that as the dispute was of a collective nature, disciplinary measures should not have been proceeded with against Workers on an individual basis. Management maintains that it was necessary to provide this essential service and that it needed to make arrangements on a temporary basis for only four weeks before the post was transferred over to the Regional Hospital site.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 2nd September, 2013, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 15th April, 2014.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3.1. The Union is of the view that all records of the initial step of the disciplinary procedures - informal counselling meetings - be expunged from personnel files with immediate effect.
2. The Workers feel that they have been severely wronged by Management as all involved in the dispute had no previous blemish on their records as they always co-operated with new initiatives to ensure the delivery of a quality service.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.The staff were not requested to take on additional duties which they were not already doing.
2. Management cannot agree to shred paperwork as to do so would be agreeing that the initial step of the disciplinary procedure - informal counselling meetings never took place which is clearly not the case.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issue before the Court concerns the invoking of disciplinary procedures against individual staff members in April 2013. Having considered the submissions made by both parties the Court notes that the matter which was the subject of the dispute before the Court has now closed and therefore in all the circumstances the Court recommends that all records pertaining to the incident should be expunged from the Workers’ personnel files with immediate effect.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
23rd May, 2014______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.