FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : SOUTHERN HEALTH BOARD - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation IR936/00/MR.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker was appointed to the post of Administrator in St. Catherine's Hospital, Tralee, in February, 1973. At that time the post was grade 5, but it was regraded to grade 6 in 1975. A new General Hospital replaced St. Catherine's in 1978, and the worker was appointed as its Administrator, grade 7.
In 1990, the Administrator post was re-evaluated to decide the correct rate of pay. The evaluation group decided the post should be at grade 8. The Board held 2 confined competitions to fill the post. The worker concerned applied for both competitions but was unsuccessful.
In January, 1992, the worker was transferred from the General Hospital in Tralee to St. Finan's Hospital, Killarney. He was still being paid at grade 7. The worker believes that the transfer was illegal and unjustified, and destroyed his career prospects. He claims that he should have been appointed to the grade 8 post in the General Hospital in 1990 and is seeking payment of grade 8 salary from December 1990 onwards, as well as a lump-sum payment for loss of office and loss of career prospects. (In 1993, he accepted a sum of £3500 as compensation for travelling to Killarney. The Board regards it as an ex-gratia payment due to the "unique circumstances" of the case).
The dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner and his recommendation was as follows:
"I, therefore, recommend that the Board should now offer, and that the worker should accept, a once-off ex gratia payment of £1,000, this payment to be in full and final settlement of all matters in dispute between the parties and only to be made after a formal acceptance by the worker of the condition outlined above."
The worker appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on the 16th of November, 2000, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 28th of March, 2001, in Limerick.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker should have been paid the grade 8 salary from December 1990 to January 1992 while he was still the administrator in the General Hospital but this did not happen.
2. The £3,500 payment was accepted by the worker as compensation for travelling to Killarney. He was told that he could raise other issues in contention at a later date.
3. There were 10 posts in General Hospitals re-graded in 1990, including the General Hospital in Tralee. Eight out of 10 posts were filled by designations. Only the worker's post was filled by competition.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Board is satisfied that the worker was treated at all times with due regard and respect. He accepted the conditions of office which pertain to all offices of health boards, and was aware of the possibility of relocation.
2. The £3,500 accepted by the worker was in full and final settlement of all issues involved in the case.
3. The Board has been consistent with the worker at all times with regard to the filling of posts. He applied on 2 occasions for the post of administrator in Tralee General Hospital but was unsuccessful.
DECISION:
The Court has carefully considered the submissions of the parties to this appeal.
It is clear that the claimant continues to have a deep sense of grievance in relation to the events surrounding the filling of the post of Administrator at Tralee General Hospital. Despite the various efforts made by the Board in the interim, that sense of grievance has clearly not abated.
The Court accepts that, at the time in question, the claimant had a reasonable expectation that he would be appointed to the upgraded post. However, it is also clear that the Board acted properly and within agreed procedures in filling the post by confined competition.
Having regard to all the circumstances surrounding this case, the Court considers that the approach of the Rights Commissioner to bringing about a full and final settlement of this protracted dispute is appropriate. However, the Court believes that the ex-gratia payment recommended should be increased to one of £3,000. This payment should be made on receipt by the Board of a formal acceptance by the claimant that all of the issues giving rise to this dispute are now resolved. Should the claimant so wish, the payment could be deferred and added to his retirement lump-sum. However, this would be a matter entirely at the discretion of the claimant.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
19th April, 2001______________________
CON/CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.