FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : ORDNANCE SURVEY IRELAND - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Fixed-term contract.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker was recruited by public competition to Ordnance Survey Ireland (OSI) on the 8th of January, 2001, on a 3-year fixed contract. He was employed as a mapping assistant in Kilkenny. Following major restructuring in the OSI, all of the mapping assistants who were temporary were allowed to compete for permanent jobs which were subsequently known as "Level 4". The worker applied for the competition/interview but was unsuccessful.
Following the competition, the worker sought information concerning his interview. There were 5 competencies and the worker had failed on "teamwork". The Union is not questioning the integrity of the Interview Board but felt that the worker should be given a further contract and that, during it, he could be interviewed again. OSI was not agreeable to this, stating that it was clear that the contract was temporary, and also that the position was no longer needed. The Union is also seeking that the worker should be paid the rate for the job of level 4 - the capacity at which he is presently working - a rate of €560 - €570 per week. At present he is earning approximately €415 per week.
The worker referred his case to the Labour Court on the 20th of November, 2003, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 22nd of December, 2003. The worker agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker has an excellent record and no disciplinary problems. At his most recent appraisal he was deemed to be a good team worker and was meeting appropriate standards.
2. The Union believes that as per the restructuring agreement there should be 16 Level 4 positions in Kilkenny; at present there are only 13 positions filled.
3. The worker has been given no clear explanation as to why he failed at the interview and he was denied any right to an independent appeal.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker was made aware at all times of his recruitment that he was on a temporary contract. The contract is legally binding.
2. The position for which the worker was originally employed is no longer required. It ceases on expiry of the contract.
3. If OSI were to accede to the Union's claim it could have implications for the future use of temporary contracts and create an undesirable precedent.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Union has put forward a compelling case as to why the claimant should be given a further opportunity to take the assessment for appointment to a Level 4 post. It is regrettable that the Company refused to follow normal industrial relations procedure in dealing with the Union in this matter. The Court is of the view that, had the Company been prepared to use the services of the Labour Relations Commission (either Conciliation or the Rights Commissioner service), the concerns which it expressed to the Court as to implications of conceding the Union's claim could have been addressed.
The Court notes that the work on which the claimant is engaged is continuing and that impending decentralisation may lead to further needs for staff at his level.
In all the circumstances of this case, the Court is satisfied that the claimant should be given a further opportunity to compete for a Level 4 post. For this purpose, it is recommended that his fixed term contract should be extended for a further 12 months to expire on 7th January, 2005. During this time, he should again be assessed for appointment. The Court makes this recommendation on the basis that it will have no precedent value and will not be used or quoted in respect of a claim on behalf of any other individual.
With regard to the claimant's rate of pay, this matter should be discussed between the parties and if unresolved should be processed through normal industrial relations machinery including the LRC and the Court.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
12th January, 2004______________________
CON/MB.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.