FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HSE SOUTH - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY INDEPEDENT WORKERS UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal of Recommendation of a Rights Commissioner Ir76073/09/Mr
BACKGROUND:
2. The issue before the Court concerns the appeal of a Rights Commissioner's Recommendation. The worker concerned has been employed in catering since 1979 and with the HSE since 2002, when she got a job as a catering assistant. From 2002 to May 2004 the worker acted in the role of Chef Grade 2 for a period of 34 weeks and was paid the appropriate allowance. Following a national recruitment competition, the worker was appointed to Chef Grade 1 in May 2004. The HSE South and SIPTU reached agreement for the inclusion of previous relevant work experience in the private sector in the calculation of incremental credit on a ratio of one increment to every three years. This resulted in the worker being placed on the 4th point of the salary scale on the date of her appointment. It is the Union's argument that because of her extensive catering experience the worker should have been placed on the top point of the scale. The Employer contends that it applied the agreement properly and appointed the worker to the correct point on the salary scale.
The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 18th August, 2009, the Rights Commissioner issued his Recommendation as follows:
"Accordingly, I now formally recommend that the HSE should agree to place (worker named) on point 6 of the relevant salary scale with effect from May 2004, as above, and (worker named) and the IWU should accept this amendment of her salary position in full and final settlement of all her claims relating to additional incremental credit."
On the 11th September, 2009 the Employer appealed the Rights Commissioners Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 10th November, 2010.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The worker's experience in the private sector should have seen her commence on the top point of the scale in May 2004. The worker can see no reason why this experience should not have been recognised in the form of 1 year experience to 1 point on the pay scale.
2 The worker is at a loss of €7,000 per annum due to her current placement on the scale as oppose to the top of the scale
3 The worker should be put on the highest point of the pay scale immediately and retrospectively to the time she commenced in May 2004
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 The grading of the worker's post is consistent with the recommendations of the Expert Group Report on Cooks. The Employer is satisfied that the worker's relevant private sector employment was calculated in a manner consistent with the terms of the agreement reached with SIPTU.
2 The Employer is not in a position to set aside the terms of the agreement in respect of this grade of staff
3 The Employer is satisfied that the worker has been afforded the maximum incremental credit available and therefore is remunerated correctly.
DECISION:
The Court has considered the submissions of both parties. The Court is satisfied that the HSE applied the terms of the assimilation agreement in full to the Claimant and accordingly allows the appeals. The Rights Commissioner's decision is accordingly set aside.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
25th November, 2010______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.