FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : GALWAY-MAYO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (GMIT) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-141543-ir-14/MH.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Claimant is employed as a Clerical Officer Grade III. Due to the retirement of a work colleague, whose duties he has taken over, he is seeking to be transferred to the higher Technician pay scale. Management reject the claim on a number of grounds.
The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 17th July 2014, the Rights Commissioner issued his Recommendation as follows:-
"The submission of the Respondent is accepted in relation to the to the range of duties undertaken by the claimant insofar as they are not inconsistent with those nationally agreed for clerical officer grade. Additionally the claimant does not have the required qualification to perform the technician role. Accordingly I am not in a position to make a recommendation favourable to the claimant as petitioned".
On the 5th August, 2014 the Worker 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 18th November 2014.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Many of the duties of the Technician grade are carried out by the Claimant and it is reasonable to expect to be transferred to the more appropriate Technician pay scale.
2. The duties are well beyond those encompassed by the Clerical grade.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Claimant does not hold the requisite qualifications in order to be regraded to the position of Technician in the Department of Culinary Arts & Service Industry.
2. The claim is cost-increasing and as such is in conflict with Public Service Stability Agreement 2012-2016.
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 regrading from Clerical Officer Grade III to Technician Grade. The Rights Commissioner found that the duties carried out by the Claimant were not inconsistent with those nationally agreed for the Clerical Officer Grade and furthermore that he did not have the required qualification to perform the Technician role. The Union appealed the Recommendation.
The Union submitted to the Court that, on the retirement of a Technician in 2012, the Claimant took over his duties and should accordingly be paid the appropriate Technician Grade of pay.
The Employer rejected the claim stating that the duties carried out by the Claimant were consistent with the job description of a Clerical Officer and any change in his duties in recent years has been primarily due to the introduction of a new software package in later 2011. It further submitted that as this was a regrading claim it was a cost-increasing claim and as such was debarred under the terms of the Public Service Stability Agreement 2012-2016 (Haddington Road Agreement).
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court is not satisfied that the Claimant's duties are consistent with those of a Technician Grade, for which he does not hold the necessary qualification and in these circumstances the Court concurs with the findings and Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner. Therefore, the appeal fails.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
18th December, 2014______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.