FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : ST PATRICK'S CENTRE (KILKENNY) LTD (REPRESENTED BY IBEC) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-145562/148350-ir-14/JT.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the Employer's claim that the Worker's upgrading to Grade 8 was unauthorised and irregular. This dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 24th March, 2015 the Rights Commissioner issued the following Recommendation:-
- "It is clear to me that the relevant HSE HR Circulars have not been abided by at any stage ... therefore the [Worker's] grade 8 appointment is invalid. As regards the overpayment, I recommend the [Worker] and her representatives meet with the [Employer] to agree a formula to deal with this"
On the 14th April, 2015 the Employee 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 the 15th September, 2015.
3. 1. The Worker was appointed to a Grade 8 post in January 2011.
2.This appointment was approved by the Chairperson of the Board.
3.The Worker is covered by the terms of Circular 17/2013.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.Grade 8 is only applicable to more senior roles than the Worker's and in larger organisations than the Employer.
2.The Worker's regrading was not approved through the appropriate procedures.
3.The resulting overpayment must be repaid by the Worker.
DECISION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties to this appeal the Court has concluded that the upgrading of the Claimant to a grade 8 position was unauthorised and irregular. In these circumstances the Court cannot uphold the Unions claim that she be restored to the grade 8 position.
The Court is further of the view that having regard to the irregularity in the original upgrading and the Claimant’s position within the organisation at the time, the employers position regarding repayment of the difference between the salary applicable to the Claimant correct grading and that of the grade 8 post is reasonable.
It is the decision of the Court that arrangements be put in place to recover the overpayment in the period up to the Claimant’s expected retirement date.
The Union’s appeal is disallowed and the Rights Commissioner’s recommendation is affirmed, as modified by the decision.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
22nd September, 2015______________________
JMcCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.