SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
BOOTS IRELAND LTD
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
(REPRESENTED BY MANDATE TRADE UNION)
Chairman: Mr Foley
Employer Member: Mr Marie
Worker Member: Mr McCarthy
1. An appeal of an Adjudication Officer's Decision No(s)ADJ-00013407, CA-00017619
2. This matter was referred to an Adjudication Officer for investigation and Recommendation. On 21 May 2019 the Adjudication Officer issued his Recommendation.
The employee appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on 21 June 2019 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
A Labour Court hearing took place on 27 August 2019
The Court has given very careful consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties.
The matter before the Court is a trade dispute centring on the worker’s dissatisfaction as regards a performance rating applied to her under the employer’s performance management system for the year September 2016 to August 2017.
It is clear to the Court that an absence on the part of the worker in the period impacted significantly on the operation of the performance management system as regards the worker, with particular reference to the normal schedule of engagements which would take place in a year as part of the performance management system. The Court is satisfied that any such impact was not the fault of either party.
It is a cause of concern to the Court that, notwithstanding the parties’ engagements to date, they were unable to agree before the Court as to whether the worker was absent throughout the period from August 2016 to 8thOctober 2016. The parties were able to agree that the worker was absent from 30thOctober 2016 to 7thMay 2017.
The Court notes that the performance management system is linked to a bonus paid annually. In the case of the worker she received no bonus in respect of the year in question. Bonuses paid in that year, depending on performance, ranged from €772 to €1,159.
It would appear to the Court to be reasonable to conclude that, because the worker was present only for the period from 7thMay 2017 to the end of the review year on 31stAugust 2017, the opportunity to apply normal mechanisms as regards interim performance review with subsequent opportunity to improve performance based on such review was necessarily extremely limited in the worker’s case.
It is not possible for the Court to intervene in the assessment made of the worker’s performance. It does however appear to the Court that this trade dispute has arisen from the impact of the worker’s absence on the normal operation of performance management in the store. The Court finds that neither party is responsible for that situation.
In all of the circumstances, and entirely without prejudice to either party, the Court recommends that in order to bring this trade dispute to a reasonable conclusion having regard to the particular circumstances which arose, the employer should make a goodwill gesture to the worker. In particular, the Court recommends that the employer pay a sum of €450 to the worker in full and final settlement of the within dispute.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
28 August 2019Chairman
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to David Campbell, Court Secretary.