SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
A FOOD COMPANY
- AND -
|Employer Member:||Mr Murphy|
|Worker Member:||Ms Treacy|
1.Disputed Disciplinary Action
2.This dispute could not be resolved at local level and the Union referredthe claim to the Workplace Relations Commissionwhich the Employer refused to attend. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 12 August 2019 in accordance with Section 20 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 17 June 2020 in a virtual Court room.
3. 1. The Union is seeking confirmation that the Employer did not meet the standard of Statutory Instrument 146 2000.
2. The Union argue that the Employer did not follow their own disciplinary policy.
The Employer chose not to appear before the Court. Therefore, the claim made on behalf of the Worker was uncontested.
The claim on behalf of the Worker outlined several flaws in the disciplinary process that led to a final written warning.
The Court recognises the right of an employer to regulate the activities of employees during working time that are not related to their employment and the Court notes that the Employer in this case had raised this matter previously with the Worker.
However, on the basis of the uncontested claim, the Court concludes that the processes used by the Employer were sufficiently flawed to recommend that the final written warning be expunged from the Worker’s record.
|Signed on behalf of the Labour Court|
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Heather Murray, Court Secretary.