FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HSE DUBLIN MID LEINSTER - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Incremental Credit
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between the HSE and the worker in relation to incremental credit. The worker spent a number of years acting up to a Grade VIII position prior to being permanently appointed to that post. The worker is claiming that he should have received incremental credit for the period he spent acting up prior to his permanent appointment to the substantive post. Management's position is that Circular 10/71 applied to the worker and that he was appointed and paid in line with the provisions of that circular.
On the 7th March 2011, the worker referred the matter to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Recommendation of the Court. A Labour Court hearing took place on 14th July, 2011.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The worker acted up for three years (2004-2007) to a Grade VIII position. His claim relates to arrears of pay for the three years in question retrospective to the date of his promotion to the permanent Grade VIII position (2007). This is a fair and reasonable claim in all the circumstances.
2 Despite the introduction of the Public Service Agreement 2010-2014, the policy in existence at the time covered the issues addressed in the worker's claim and arrears in relation to pay continue to be paid within the sector.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The worker's claim cannot be processed as it is a cost increasing claim precluded by the current Public Service Agreement 2010-2014.
2 The provisions of Circular10/71 were correctly applied to the worker on his promotion to the Grade VIII post. He was also in receipt of an acting up allowance for the period in question and received increments in his substantive Grade VII post.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has carefully considered the submissions of both parties in this case.
The Court finds that the complainant accepted promotion on terms agreed in 2007. In 2010, having made a very belated claim for an improved assimilation arrangement relating to that promotion, he rejected an offer from the HSE which would have seen him credited with increments for the period of time he spent acting up in the post prior to his appointment. That offer was then withdrawn and is no longer available. The policy under which that offer was made has also been withdrawn and is no longer in use.
In the interim, the Public Service Agreement has come into effect. This is a cost increasing claim that is prohibited under the terms of that Agreement.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of this claim.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
12th August 2011______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.