FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : RIALTO DEVELOPMENTS ASSOCIATION (REPRESENTED BY FATIMA REGENERATION BOARD) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner Recommendation r-071943-ir-08/SR
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns an appeal by the employer of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-071943-ir-08/SR.
The issue concerns a worker who was employed on a Community Employment Scheme in the Rialto Development Association.
The issue in dispute concerns the cessation of the scheme and the Union's contention that an exension to the scheme was refused to the worker despite her being eliglible on the basis of her age and that it had been previously applied to comparable workers.
Management's position is that Community Employment Schemes are in place to the long term unemployed gain experience and subsequently enable them to return to the workforce. It contends that the worker in question had completed the scheme and was sufficiently prepared to re-enter the workforce and that extending the scheme was inappropriate as it would deny a place on the scheme to someone else.
The dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation. His recommendation issued on 28th April, 2009 and awarded the claimant
€3,000 compensation on the basis that, although not automatically qualified for an extension to her participation on the Scheme, the worker had an expectation on the basis of satisfying the eligibility criteria and the fact that it had occurred previously within the organisation. This was recommended as a full and final settlement between the parties and was not to be used as precedent in any future cases that may arise.
On the 8th June, 2009 the employer appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 17th September, 2009.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The rules of the Community Employment Scheme provide that participants who are over 55 are entitled to have their participation on the scheme extended for up to six years. Although qualified on the basis of her age, the worker was refused an extension, which amounted to unfavourable treatment in comparison to other workers on the Scheme.
2 The Scheme provides training to participants which enables them to prepare for re-entry into the workforce. The worker was not offered the required amount of training and when it was offered it was towards the end of the Scheme and was not put to any use.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The worker was eligible for an extension on the scheme but was not automatically entitled to it. The Scheme prepares participants for re-entry into the workforce. In this case, the worker was deemed sufficiently experienced and competent to obtain work elsewhere and create a vacancy on the Scheme for someone else.
2 The worker was provided with significant training while on the scheme. Some training is provided towards the end of the programme so that its certification is still valid when the worker obtains employment elsewhere.
DECISION:
The Court, having considered the submissions of both parties, is of the view that the amount of compensation awarded by the Rights Commissioner should be more appropriately set at €1,000.
The Court notes that the offer of a week's training at Quaker House remains open to the claimant and, should she avail of it, she should be paid for her time.
Thr Rights Commissioner's Recommendation is varied accordingly.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
8th October 2009______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.