Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A Receptionist

A Bed and Breakfast

Representatives

Self Represented

Hugh Hegarty BL instructed by Peninsula Business Services Ireland

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 - 00002899

24/07/2024

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

IR - SC - 00002900

24/07/2024

The Worker was employed as a Receptionist from October 2021 to November 2024. She submitted two claims under the Industrial Relations Act relating to her conditions of employment and the lack of procedures available to her.

The Worker worked as a Receptionist and covered the desk mainly by herself and occasionally stayed over in the Employers B & B location. She stated she often had to deal with difficult clients and difficult situations sometime outside of her work hours.  She stated there was no Worker hand book or induction hence there was no grievance procedure in place. When she tried to bring up various issues or concerns with her employer she was sometimes meet with hostility. At times she did feel bullied by her employer for example, she tried to talk about changing the rota but was told she was not flexible and she was threatened  with redundancy. The Worker felt she had  been nothing but flexible.

In a second complaint the Worker stated she was the only person on the premises and had all responsibility for everything. Working at night alone meant she was forced into vulnerable positions without any support. She 'acted-up´ regularly from her role as receptionist be that dealing with maintenance issues, cleaning vomit at 5am and dealing with threats from intoxicated guests on her own. Her employer also has two apartments across the road that she rents out on a nightly basis, that the Worker was also responsible for. On several occasions she had to deal with issues over there, for example a guest had an accident one night and she had to call an ambulance and calm the injured mans partner.  

The Employer asserts that the Worker's claim under the Industrial Relations Act is entirely without merit. Contrary to the Worker's assertion, the Employer confirms that the Worker was issued with a grievance procedure at the commencement of their employment. Furthermore, the Worker consistently demonstrated an ability to raise concerns and engage in dialogue with the Employer in a clear and competent manner. While the Worker references a desire to amend the working rota, the Employer acknowledges that such discussions did take place. As a result of reasonable and constructive dialogue, the rota was duly adjusted to accommodate the Worker's request to work four days per week. This exemplifies the Employer's willingness to consider and, where appropriate, act upon the Worker's expressed needs. The working relationship between the parties was, in fact, a positive and communicative one. The Worker routinely raised various issues, needs, and preferences, which were addressed in a timely and respectful manner. While the outcomes of these discussions varied—some resulting in the Worker's favour and others not—the Employer maintains that the Worker was at all times aware of, and capable of, raising matters and that these were handled appropriately.

It is the position of the Employer that the Industrial Relations Acts require Workers to follow their employer's internal grievance procedures before they can pursue a claim with the WRC. This means Workers must go through the steps outlined in their company's policies to address their concerns.

The purpose of internal procedures is to provide a mechanism for resolving workplace disputes at the lowest level possible. It allows the employer to address issues promptly and fairly, potentially preventing a more serious dispute from escalating. The Worker in this case has never mentioned bully or harassment and it is our submission that the Worker's own description as set out in the workplace relations complaint form does not meet the threshold of Bullying within the definition of the code of practice.

The Worker is making a second claim under the Industrial Relations Act, claiming that for a regularising of "acting up" arrangements. It is the position of the Employer that this claim refers to a Worker who has been "temporarily" promoted to a higher position and is seeking a recommendation that the acting up position be made permanent.

It is the Employer's submission that the Worker was at no time acting up, there is no higher position, and the Worker is no longer a Worker.

We are seeking a recommendation that the claim is not well founded and the Worker was not acting up.

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

In considering any industrial relations complaints due regard must be given to how the parties interacted and how disputes were raised prior to them coming to the WRC. In this instance there appears to have been very little complaints raised by the Worker while she was employed and she raised the disputes formally after she left the employment. There is no evidence of bullying during the employment and no evidence it was ever raised as an issue during employment. There was no evidence of a threat of redundancy. There was no evidence of any complaint being raised in writing formally and the Complainant had been advised of the grievance procedure in her contract of employment. An Employer is entitled to know of complaints at the earlies possible opportunity and to have the opportunity to address them asap. I do not see that this happened in this case. While the Complainant certainly did more duties, on a few occasions, than just register people into the premises there were not substantial enough for a third party Adjudicator to warrant or recommend an extra premium, when no request for same premium appears to have been made while the Complainant was employed and no opportunity was given to the Employer to address the issue directly. I found the Complainant to be a well able and detailed person and it does not seem feasible that she could not have raised any issues while employed with the Employer.

I find in favour of the Employer in IR - SC – 00002899 and IR-SC-00029000.

Trade Dispute