Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A Shop Assistant

A Supermarket

Representatives

None

A HR Consultant

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 - 00005465

27/10/2025

The Worker referred a dispute to the WRC on 27th October 2025.  His employment ended in February 2026.

The Worker contends he was treated in a disrespectful and intimidating manner by management.  He raised a formal written grievance about this behaviour on 8th September 2025.  He believes he has been targeted and treated unfairly, including being suspended by the person who was a subject of his grievance complaint, for raising this grievance.  His grievance complaint was investigated, and he was permitted an opportunity to appeal the outcome.  The Worker told the hearing that he did not agree with the findings of the appeals manager and that is why he referred this dispute to the WRC.  Since he referred his dispute to the WRC, he is no longer in the employment of the Employer. 

The Worker raised a formal grievance on 8th September 2025.  This formal complaint was investigated in accordance with the company Grievance Procedure.  The Worker appealed the outcome of that grievance investigation.  An appeals manager was appointed to hear the appeal.  The appeal hearing was also conducted in line with the company Grievance Procedure. 

Separate to the grievance investigation, the store manager, two assistant managers and the area manager formed the view the Worker was acting “irrationally” and “was paranoid”.  On 30th September 2025, the area manager called the Worker into an informal meeting.  The Worker was permitted to bring a witness.  The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the Worker’s behaviour and to tell the Worker that it would be best if he took a few days off to give him time to cool off.  The Worker was provided with details of the Employee Assistance Programme (EAP) at this meeting.  No real discussion took place at the meeting as the Worker said he felt unsafe.  Accordingly, a decision was made to instruct the Worker to take a few days leave.  This instruction had nothing to do with the formal grievance raised by the Worker and was to help him rather than penalise him.

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

The Worker raised a formal grievance which was investigated in line with the company Grievance Procedure.  The investigation and subsequent appeal were conducted by persons unconnected with the grievance complaint.  The appeal hearing was also conducted in line with the company Grievance Procedure. 

The role of the WRC when investigating industrial relations disputes is to hear the parties and set out its opinion in the form of a recommendation that can assist the parties to bring a resolution to matters in dispute.  At the time of the hearing the Worker was no longer in the employment of the Employer.  The Worker was asked what resolution he sought from the WRC hearing.  The Worker outlined that at the time he referred the dispute to the WRC he was looking for an apology from management, however, as he is no longer in the employment of the Employer, he is not sure what outcome he is looking for.  It is also noted that the dispute forms part of various employment rights claims before the WRC.

Considering all the foregoing, I recommend the Worker accepts he has no current dispute with his previous Employer.

I recommend the Worker accepts he has no current dispute with his previous Employer.