Case Number: ADJ-00009753. Workplace Relations Commission

• Docket Number: ADJ-00009753
• Hearing Date: 28 March 2018
• Date: 01 June 2018
• Court: Workplace Relations Commission
• Parties: Complainant v Respondent
• Respondent: A Courier company

ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00009753

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Anonymised Parties	Office Administrator	A Courier company

Complaint(s):

Act	Complaint/Dispute Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977	CA-00012784-001	26/07/2017

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 28/03/2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Roger McGrath

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).

Background:

The complainant commenced working with the respondent as an office administrator on 1stApril 2016. The complainant resigned from her employment on 4th April 2017. Her weekly gross pay was €413.64 and she worked 40 hours per week. A Complaint Form, claiming constructive dismissal, was lodged with the WRC on 26th July 2017. The complainant's preferred redress was compensation. The respondent's preferred redress was re-engagement.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The complainant submitted that when she started working with the respondent she was promised training but this never materialised and she had to teach herself the ins and outs of the work. Due to the amount of work she was expected to do she asked her boss to increase her hours but he refused. When a colleague returned to work from maternity leave the atmosphere in the office became quite stressful and the complainant felt quite very uncomfortable. At times the complainant felt she was being bullied. As time went on the complainant felt she was being asked to do a lot more than her fair share of the work. The complainant submitted that although she discussed this with her boss nothing was done about it. The complainant's relationship with her colleagues continued to deteriorate. She raised an issue of bullying with her boss on 22nd march 2017, but nothing was done. The complainant was not comfortable at work and went to her doctor who prescribed medication for her and advised her to stay off work for six days, which she did. However, when those six days were up the complainant could not face going back to work and she resigned by email on 4th April 2017. Within a month of resigning the complainant had set up her own business, earning more than she had with the respondent. The complainant stated that she had never been issued with an Employee Handbook. The complainant stated that when she sent her resignation email she thought the respondent would do something for her and she was disappointed when he did not.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The respondent submitted that they had been very happy with the complainant's work and would have offered her a new contract if she had not resigned. In direct evidence the respondent denied that the complainant had been given too much work. The respondent also agreed that the complainant had raised an issue of bullying in late March 2017 and they had been taking advice on the issue when the complainant went on sick leave. The respondent stated that the complainant had been given a copy of the employee Handbook. The respondent stated that, although there were issues on the floor, he runs a professional and caring workplace, never anything other than that.

Findings and Conclusions:

Undoubtedly, there were difficulties between the complainant and her colleagues, however,her assertion that she was given too much was categorically denied by the respondent. The complaint is one of constructive dismissal. The Unfair Dismissals Act and the resulting jurisprudence have set a high bar in relation to what will justify the termination of a contract of employment. It is, after all, a breach of a legally binding contract. In the case of an employer wishing to do so, there must be cause, a fair process must have been followed and the decision to dismiss must be within the range of reasonable sanctions in relation to the conduct giving rise to the disciplinary proceedings. It is relatively easy for an employee to terminate their employment by simply resigning and in most, if not all cases an action for breach of contract is unlikely to arise. When an employee terminates the contract of employment and then makes a complaint of constructive unfair dismissal that is a different matter. In ‘Dismissal Law in Ireland’ the late Dr Mary Redmond has said (at p340) writes: "There is something of a mirror image between constructive dismissal and ordinary dismissal. Just as an employer for reasons of fairness and natural justice must go through disciplinary procedures before dismissing, so true an employee should invoke the employer’s grievance procedures in an effort to resolve his grievance, The duty is an imperative in employee resignations. Where grievance procedures exist they should be followed: Conway v Ulster bank Limited. In Conway the EAT considered that the claimant did not act reasonably in resigning and without first having ‘substantially utilised the grievance procedure to attempt to remedy her complaints." The Supreme Court has said that; ‘The conduct of the employer complained of must be unreasonable and without...