Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92428 Case Number: LCR13751 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: EASTERN REGION FISHERIES - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
A dispute concerning a claim for the upgrading of a worker.
Recommendation:
5. Given the staff structure of the Dundalk District it is the
view of the Court that the application of the Voluntary Early
Retirement Scheme to the previous holder of the Inspector's post
has given rise to the current dispute.
The Court finds that whilst the post holder retired, the duties
and responsibilities have remained. It is the view of the Court
that it is unreasonable to consider that the duties and
responsibilities of the Assistant Inspector encompass those of the
Inspector.
The Court accepts that the Assistant Inspector had a liability to
carry out the duties and responsibilities of the Inspector from
time to time, however, it is the view of the Court that it was not
intended that this liability would be extended to exercising the
duties and responsibilities for an undetermined period.
The Court has noted that in rejecting the claim the Fisheries
Board were advised the matter was being considered as part of the
overall staff requirements of the Regional Fisheries Board.
In all the circumstances the Court considers the matter should be
regulated as quickly as possible. In the meantime the claimant
should be paid the Higher Duty Allowance with effect from the date
on which he took up the duties.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92428 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13751
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: EASTERN REGION FISHERIES
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. A dispute concerning a claim for the upgrading of a worker.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned commenced employment with the Board in
1970 and in 1987 was transferred as an Assistant Inspector, to the
Dundalk Fishery District. In 1988 the Inspector at Dundalk took
sick leave and was absent save for a period of 11 weeks in mid
1988 until he retired in 1989. During the initial period of
absence of the Inspector the worker was asked and agreed to take
on the role of Inspector. The worker did not receive any
remuneration for performing the duties pertaining to the higher
grade. In May, 1989, the worker was informed by the Board that
the Inspector would not be returning to work and was availing of a
voluntary redundancy scheme. The worker continued to carry out
the duties of Acting Inspector and in April, 1991, he lodged a
claim with the Board for the upgrading of his position. The claim
was rejected by the Board.
The dispute was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Relations Commission on 13th August 1991. A conciliation
conference was held on 24th February, 1992 at which agreement was
not reached. The issue was referred to the Labour Court on 23rd
July, 1992 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act,
1990. The Court investigated the dispute on 5th August, 1992.
UNIONS ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Since 1988 the worker has held the position of Acting
Inspector and has satisfactorily carried out the duties
pertaining to the higher grade without compensatory
remuneration. The Union accepts that on occasion an
Assistant Inspector may have to stand in for an Inspector but
this would be for a matter of weeks or months not five years.
2. Though the Inspector availed of a voluntary redundancy
scheme, he did so because of ill health. As his duties and
responsibilities still remain and are unchanged there is
valid reason for filling the vacancy by upgrading the
Assistant Inspector.
3. In 1991 the Board promoted a Fishery Officer to
Assistant Inspector where such a grade had not existed
before.
COMPANYS ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. As the Inspector availed of redundancy under a voluntary
scheme his position cannot be filled. The application to
fill the vacancy was rejected by the Departments of Finance
and Marine.
2. The worker concerned has over the years successfully
carried out the duties of the higher grade. It is to be
expected, however, that an Assistant Inspector often has to
stand in for an Inspector. It is also contended that there
is a certain amount of overlap between both grades.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Given the staff structure of the Dundalk District it is the
view of the Court that the application of the Voluntary Early
Retirement Scheme to the previous holder of the Inspector's post
has given rise to the current dispute.
The Court finds that whilst the post holder retired, the duties
and responsibilities have remained. It is the view of the Court
that it is unreasonable to consider that the duties and
responsibilities of the Assistant Inspector encompass those of the
Inspector.
The Court accepts that the Assistant Inspector had a liability to
carry out the duties and responsibilities of the Inspector from
time to time, however, it is the view of the Court that it was not
intended that this liability would be extended to exercising the
duties and responsibilities for an undetermined period.
The Court has noted that in rejecting the claim the Fisheries
Board were advised the matter was being considered as part of the
overall staff requirements of the Regional Fisheries Board.
In all the circumstances the Court considers the matter should be
regulated as quickly as possible. In the meantime the claimant
should be paid the Higher Duty Allowance with effect from the date
on which he took up the duties.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
27th August, 1992 Tom McGrath
A.O.S./M.H. ----------------------------------
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Ms. Aoibheann Ni Shuilleabhain, Court Secretary.