FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY IFUT) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Ms O'Donnell |
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer Recommendation No r-140751-ir-13/DI
BACKGROUND:
2. The issue involves a claim by the Union that the Employer failed to apply the correct criteria in the appointment process for a position within the University. The matter was referred to a Adjudication Officer for investigation and recommendation. On the 11th of December 2015, the Adjudication Officer issued his Recommendation as follows:
"Having fully considered the submissions made by the parties I find against the claims that the Respondent acted contrary to its Statutes and against the claim that the Claimant be appointed Head of Discipline of the Department of French for the next Academic year. "
On the 21st of January 2016 the Worker appealed the Adjudication Officer'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 23rd of February 2016.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Worker was the only candidate eligible for the position.
2. A decision to hold an election for the post was not warranted as only one eligible candidate applied for the post.
3. No exceptional circumstances arose to justify non-merit of the position.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. As no other candidate (apart from the Worker) holding the rank of Senior Lecturer or above, applied for the position, the provision to allow candidates on a lower grade run for election due to exceptional circumstances was invoked.
2. The overriding principle for appointment to an academic leadership position in College is that successful candidates must be elected or come through some form of open, competitive process.
3.In accordance with the concept of collegiality and College norms, the principle of election supersedes all other considerations. To be successful in an election, the candidate must receive the majority of the vote, which the Worker did not.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court notes that in advancing its claim the Union has placed significant reliance on a contention that the failure to appoint the Claimant to the disputed position contravened the College Statutes.
This Court has neither the competence nor the authority to interpret or apply those Statutes. Rather, in its approach to the case the Court has been guided by normal standards of good industrial relations and employment practice.
Having considered the submissions of the parties the Court is unable to identify any reasonable basis upon which it could disagree with the conclusions reachedby theAdjudication Officer. Accordingly the recommendation of theAdjudication Officeris affirmed and the appeal is disallowed
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
26th February 2016______________________
JKChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jason Kennedy, Court Secretary.