FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : GALWAY COUNTY COUNCIL (REPRESENTED BY THE LGMSB) - AND - J.J. LOUGHLIN (REPRESENTED BY MCINERNEY SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Wrongly Over Looked For Promotion. Unfair Selection
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker, a full-time firefighter, has been Acting Sub-Officer since 1986 and Acting Station Officer from June 2005 to December 2007. In February 2007, the Council advertised for the permanent positions of Sub-Officer and Station Officer. The Worker was unsuccessful in the competition for Station Officer. A total of eight firefighters were successful in the competition for Sub-Officer and were placed on a panel in order of merit. The Worker was placed number six on this panel, and the first four individuals on the panel were appointed Sub-Officer.
This dispute concernsallegations made by the Worker in relation to his experiences during both the assessment process and the interview process. The Worker referred his case to the Labour Court on the 2nd of August, 2007, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Worker agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 18th of June, 2008.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The Worker had significantly more experience as Acting Sub-Officer than the first three successful candidates in the competition for Sub-Officer.
2. The Worker was not treated fairly by the Council before, during and after this process.
3.The Worker has suffered financially as a direct result of the Council's unfair treatment of him.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The interviews for both positions were carried out by an independent board.
2.At no stage during either the assessment process or the interview process did the Worker raise any issue with the Council about the conduct of the process. It was only when the Worker learned that he was not placed in one of the top four positions on the panel for Sub-Officer that he raised an issue in relation to his alleged experiences.
3.The Council investigated the Worker's allegations in relation to his experiences during both the assessment process and the interview process but could find no evidence to support these allegations. The Council asserts that the assessment process and the interview process were carried out impartially in line with best practice, and that all candidates were treated fairly throughout the processes.
RECOMMENDATION:
In cases involving the filling of posts by competition the Court has consistenly taken the view that in the absence of proven irregularity in the selection process or manifest irrationally in the result, the Court will not interfere with the decision of he duly-appointed selection board.
In this case the Court is not satisied that the Claimant has made a sufficient case on which the Court could recommend that the outcome of the competition at issue be interfered with.
Accordingly the Court does not recommend concession of the worker's claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
7th July, 2008______________________
JMcCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.