Correos convicts Ibi office manager for work harassment against a worker

State Association to mail and Telegrams pay a worker 10,000 euros in compensation for moral damage suffered by a situation Workplace harassment by the Ibi Unit manager. This was stated in a decision of the Social Court No. 5 of Alicante, which was recently upheld by the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ), which dismissed the appeal made by the State Attorney General’s Office.

The decision, approved by the TSJ, was considered proven. the worker’s fundamental right to moral integrity has been violated and the employee affiliated with Comisiones Obreras, who appears as co-plaintiff in the case. The judge of the first sentence also agreed to “immediately stop” the employee’s workplace harassment and to provide him with the necessary protection. In the confirmed decision, it is stated that the director of the Ibi de Correos unit “creates a physically, mentally and spiritually damaging situation to the detriment of the worker by carrying out continuous, systematic and repeated acts of unjustified harassment and intimidation against the worker”. and moral integrity.

Complaint

The abused worker has been with Correos since January 2010 and was granted fixed-non-permanent status in June 2012. He was appointed to the Ibi office in 2017 and filed a complaint with the company on 16 April 2020 by the Ibi Delivery Unit manager alleging harassment at the workplace. A case of her giving personal testimony was opened from the office, but closed in January 2021 saying there was no evidence of workplace harassment, which is the opposite of the court considering the complainant has proven herself a victim. “mobbing”.

According to the facts proven in the sentence, a colleague of the woman who was abused stated that the manager constantly complained about the hard work of the employees and that they talked a lot at work. In addition, the applicant she had stopped talking to him and was ignoring him, he said, according to the witness, “it will be him who will ignore her”. If the woman spoke to a colleague or union representative, the manager would appear immediately to end the conversation. Likewise, she asked she “rudely” to sit in her office and inform her “that she would have to deal with him personally, something that didn’t happen to the other employees”.

Tension

Another colleague, the director’s “She got very angry when I didn’t pay enough attention to her”. The tension between the two is “high, the struggle between the two», according to this worker.

Likewise, a person in charge of the unit and two other colleagues agreed to confirm that on one occasion the manager put the worker in the van and that the worker arrived “sulky and in great anguish.” This officer also stated that the manager had asked him to state in writing that he had never sat next to the plaintiff, but refused to do so and admitted that he had only written about his last dinner at work.

Ibi Post Office where workplace harassment took place. INFORMATION


The Comisiones Obreras delegate also reassured the office staff that they were taking care of the office staff at the end of 2019 without any problems, and said that when they interviewed the abused woman, the manager seemed to blame her for neglecting the job despite the lack of any backlog. customers.

On the other hand, an industry chief and another witness said: There were no records of “inappropriate actions” by the complainant and the principal..

The worker re-entered the company in September 2021 after being on leave since June 2020 and, according to the judge, the attitude of the manager remained the same and He shows more demand and enthusiasm in the performance of his job duties than his other colleagues.

Fear

Plaintiff met with the industry head on October 7, 2021, telling him: I’m afraid to go to work and said he “didn’t notice any hostility or advances from the director” at the time. The manager was willing to park the differences with the worker.

A prevention technician published and appreciated a report on psychosocial risks”a high risk situation relationships with superior when it comes to auditing”.

The verdict states that the worker was diagnosed with anxiety-depressive disorder, and a psychologist’s report describes episodes where the worker’s version was “probably credible and his statement was valid, where the manager ignored or excluded him. yells or yells at him, interrupts him, forbids him to talk to his classmates, underestimates him, tarnishes his reputation, enlarges his mistakes, threatens with disciplinary action, supervises or supervises him with excessive enthusiasm, evaluates his work negatively… etc.” according to the sentence.

Again director denied harassment and although the State Attorney’s Office claims it was an “employment dispute,” the court that upheld the claim points out that, in addition to the evidence presented at trial, the internal file has ample means to assess for signs of workplace harassment. The judge convicting Correos, in his ruling, stated that the principal’s signs of harassment included “controlling or restricting the plaintiff’s communications with other workers or union representatives, monitoring his work with excessive enthusiasm, invading his personal space”. conveying instructions, performing duties improperly or in particularly adverse conditions for the worker, and using an excessive tone of voice in communicating with the plaintiff.”

ABSOLUTE STATUS OF THE EMPLOYEE

this high court of justice states in the decision approving the penalty to mail That the facts declared as proven by the Alicante court fit the definition of workplace bullying made by domestic regulations and European and international law. TSJ’s case law defines workplace harassment as a situation that manifests itself as: hostile behavior towards the victim’s personal dignity – defamation, teasing, teasing, criticism, or other sarcastic behavior- or against your professionalism – monotonous, unnecessary, disproportionate, abusive or inappropriate tasks according to their occupational category-».

In the prosecuted case, the TSJ’s decision states that there is a situation of imbalance where “work conflict is part of a work environment”. puts the employee in a vulnerable position before his superior and the use of direction and regulation by the latter is particularly disproportionate and arbitrary to harm the health and dignity of the claimant in a systematic and sustained manner, injuring his health and physical integrity, and promotion expert”.

Therefore, TSJ considers that the sentence appealed is lawful and there is workplace harassment without prejudice to the existence of a work conflict. Add the clause that it is “one”. continued degrading treatment by a supervisortends to put the worker in a state of unprovable desperation to adopt the “precautions and recommendations” of the company’s internal evaluation report and later with a high psychosocial risk.

Source: Informacion

Popular

More from author

The court rejected the claim of 10 million rubles from Mamaev’s former Wife.

The capital's Presnensky Regional Court rejected Pavel Mamaev's case to save 10 million rubles against the former Wife Alan Mamaeva. This city was reported...

Kurkumin restrains the brain after epilepsy attacks, scientists 12:09

Scientists from the Institute of Genetics and Development Biology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences found that Kurkumin's bioactive compound helps to reduce the...

The latest iPhone in Russia 12:25 recorded in Russia

The cost of Basic iPhone 16 fell 70 thousand rubles in Russia. About it reports Hi-Tech Postal Portal. The iPhone 16 is the basic and...

Olga Seryabkina published a photo in a collar leather overalls 12:31

The singer Olga Seryabinea showed the figure in the jumpsuit with its neckline. The former participant of the cerebro group published a photo on...