FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HSE DUBLIN MID LEINSTER - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioners Recommendation No: r-128143-ir-12JOC
BACKGROUND:
2. This case is an appeal by the worker of Rights Commissioners Recommendation No: r-128143-ir-12JOC. The issue concerns a claim by the worker for incremental credit in relation to a period of acting up into the Ambulance Officer role. The Union contends that the worker ceased acting in the grade and returned to his substantive post on the instructions of management and suffered significant losses as a result. He was then appointed into the Ambulance Officer role in 2009 but was not given incremental credit for the periods of acting.
Management's position is that the worker cannot be paid incremental credit for his previous experience in the role as he was was not acting into the role immediately prior to his appointment.
The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation. A Recommendation issued on the 22nd April 2013 and recommended that the worker be paid an additional increment with effect from 22nd June 2009 in accordance with Circular 10/71 - starting pay on promotion.
On the 30th May the worker appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 21st August 2013.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 Incremental credit is applied in circumstances where previous experience in the role can be demonstrated. It is unacceptable and unfair that the worker in this case had the relevant experience but yet did not receive incremental credit as the experience was gained within the service as opposed to externally .
2 There have been many incidences whereby incremental credit has been applied in similar circumstances. There has been no consistency in how Management has applied its policies in this regard.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The worker was not awarded incremental credit on appointment to the Ambulance Officer role as he was not acting into the role immediately prior to his appointment.
2 The worker was paid an acting up allowance at the relevant time and received incremental credit in his substantive role. This is the normal practice in such circumstances and the terms of Circular 10/71 apply on promotion.
DECISION:
This is an appeal by the Union on behalf of an employee against a Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation which found against his claim for incremental credit on appointment to the position of Ambulance Officer on 22ndJune 2009, in respect of his previous acting experience as an Acting Ambulance Officer. The Rights Commissioner did not find in favour of his claim, however, he recommended that the Appellant should be granted an additional increment with effect from 22ndJune 2009, in accordance with the provisions of Circular 10/71.
Having considered all aspects of the Appellant's appeal of the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation, the Court does not concede the claim, however, as it is accepted that Circular 10/71 was inappropriately applied to the Appellant from the date of his appointment to the permanent post, the Court recommends that the appropriate arrears should be paid and the first Long Service Increment should be applied to the Appellant’s salary with effect 22ndJune 2013.
The Rights Commissioner recommendation is varied accordingly.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
10th September 2013______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.