A recruiter who “went into full combat mode” after being told he could do with training on his communication style has failed in a claim for constructive dismissal against jobs website Indeed.com
The worker, Liam Howlin, claimed when he quit in February 2023 that he had been subjected to threatening behaviour, defamation, the denial of his rights and “unacceptable” behaviour from its management.
In a decision on Mr Howlin’s case, a Workplace Relations Commission adjudicator wrote that his three-page letter of resignation was “a diatribe of bitter attack against every level of management” that had tried to either assist or manage him at work.
Rejecting Mr Howlin’s complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 against Indeed Ireland Operations Ltd, the WRC found he had failed to show it was reasonable for him to quit his job.
The WRC was told that in the first half of 2022, around six or seven months into Mr Howlin’s employment, a colleague complained about the “manner and tone” of the complainant’s messages on Slack.
Mr Howlin’s position was that it had been resolved informally following the intervention of a human resources officer, who led a phone mediation between Mr Howlin and his colleague “to everyone’s satisfaction”.
However, in August 2022, Mr Howlin’s line manager pulled him up about his alleged tone in messages to another colleague. WRC adjudicator Penelope McGrath wrote that the message exchange “gave rise to an assessment of confrontational, condescending and passive-aggressive language”.
The WRC heard that Mr Howlin raised a formal grievance about a quarterly review conducted in October 2022 which included a claim that he had been “condescending, dismissive and abrasive” in a Slack message with a colleague. The review document noted that it was the “second Slack incident with a colleague at Indeed”.
The review gave him a rating of two points out of five and found him “not to have met expectations”, the tribunal heard.
Mr Howlin “did not embrace a softer, more inclusive tone” despite being spoken to by his line manager “after the previous Slack incident in quarter 2”, the report added. The document recorded that Mr Howlin had accused the company of having a “pedantic, controlling Slack monitoring policy”.
Its author wrote: “[That] indicates to me that Liam did not embrace any constructive learnings or want to take any accountability from the previous Slack incident.”
The WRC heard that Mr Howlin raised a formal grievance over the October 2022 review which found the review comments were “inappropriate” and recommended they be withdrawn.
His position was that by the time this was under investigation the following month, he was “being excluded” from work-related activities and had lost mentoring and career development opportunities. He laid the blame for that at the feet of Mr DB, his line manager.
The investigation concluded in December 2022, upholding Mr Howlin’s grievance with and concluding that “inappropriate statements” were made in the October quarterly review document – and recommending that these be deleted.
It also recommended a review of the rating given – but added: “In light of observed behaviours, we are recommending your participation in formal training for your communication/interpersonal skills as the lack of respect shown at times is concerning.”
Adjudicator Penelope McGrath wrote that she was “struck” by Mr Howlin’s “very strong sense of grievance”. She noted that he had accused both his subordinates and his superiors of “wilful acts of misinterpretation and indeed falsification” – but had “no insight or acceptance of any wrongdoing on his part”.
Ms McGrath noted that Mr Howlin “was definitely not happy with the outcome” – in particular the suggestion that he needed formal training in interpersonal skills.
However, she noted that Mr Howlin’s subsequent appeal of this decision “largely upheld” the original findings.
Mr Howlin’s position was that he was subjected to a campaign of victimisation and penalisation for bringing the grievance.
When the appeal outcome was released in February 2023, he wrote to Indeed’s HR department and stated: “The defamation, harassment and unreasonable behaviour is not only continuing but has intensified since I attempted to use the company HR resolution processes at my disposal.”
“I have no choice but resign with immediate effect as management is now making it impossible for me to fulfil my role,” he wrote. When he was offered time to reconsider, he confirmed his resignation, the tribunal noted.
Adjudicator Penelope McGrath wrote that there were “other options” open to Mr Howlin when he quit and that there was “considerable effort” from Indeed’s management to “see him through what was a seemingly difficult time”.
“It is a regrettable fact that the complainant had little to no insight into how his actions, written tone and abrasive manner were being picked up on by others,” she wrote.
“Instead of stepping back and really reflecting on this, the complainant went into full combat mode. Matters duly escalated, culminating in the complainant resigning from a position that he was good at performing,” Ms McGrath wrote.
She wrote that the fault lay with Mr Howlin, not Indeed – and found that his complaint of constructive dismissal failed.
The case was heard over the course of three days between October 2023 and February 2024. Cillian McGovern BL appeared for Mr Howlin, instructed by Crushell & Co Solicitors. Indeed was represented by Des Ryan BL, instructed by Lewis Silken.
Reporting by Stephen Bourke
