Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93535 Case Number: AD93107 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal by the College against Rights Commissioner's recommendation No CW181/93 concerning a claim for the regrading of a worker.
Recommendation:
7. It is the Court's view that job evaluation claims should be
resolved through an appropriate appeals mechanism within the
organisation. In this case having considered the submissions of
the parties the Court is satisfied that the appeal by the employer
of the Rights Commissioner's recommendation should be upheld.
The Court so decides.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr McHenry Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93535 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD10793
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
Represented by The Irish Business and Employers Confederation
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the College against Rights Commissioner's
recommendation No CW181/93 concerning a claim for the regrading of
a worker.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned commenced employment with the College in
1980, as a porter in the archives department. In November, 1991,
the Union submitted a claim on behalf of the worker for regrading
to the position of paperkeeper. The Union claims that the worker
concerned is performing similar duties to paperkeepers employed in
the National Archives
3. Local level discussions took place at which the claim was
rejected and the Union put forward a compromise proposal that the
worker be regraded to the position of library attendant.
4. A Board set-up by the College to investigate the claim found
that the worker concerned was correctly graded. The matter was
referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and
recommendation. On 20th August, 1993, the Rights Commissioner
recommended as follows:-
"I recommend that the worker is placed on the Library
Attendant grade on a personal basis at the nearest
point above his present ceiling with effect from the
last pay increase, and that he progresses up this scale
in the normal way (annual increment to it's ceiling)".
The worker was named in the recommendation.
The Rights Commissioner's recommendation was appealed by the
College to the Labour Court on 9th September, 1993. The Labour
Court hearing took place on 1st November, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Board set-up by the College to investigate the claim
was comprised entirely of management personnel. Predictably
the Board concluded that the worker was correctly graded.
2. The duties of the worker concerned are similar to the
duties performed by paperkeepers in the National Archives In
the circumstances the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
fair and reasonable.
3. The Union requests the Court to reject the employer's
appeal.
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The worker's claim has been thoroughly examined by a
Board made up of appropriate personnel from within the
College. In the course of its examination the Board
interviewed the worker and was shown various elements of his
work.
2. The Board examined an outline of the duties performed by
the worker and the duties of a paperkeeper and a library
assistant.
3. The Board having compared the various job descriptions
with the duties carried out by the worker was satisfied that
the appropriate grading for the worker is that of porter.
DECISION:
7. It is the Court's view that job evaluation claims should be
resolved through an appropriate appeals mechanism within the
organisation. In this case having considered the submissions of
the parties the Court is satisfied that the appeal by the employer
of the Rights Commissioner's recommendation should be upheld.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
17th December, 1993 ----------------
F.B./U.S. Chairman