Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00007556
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A plumber | A Hospital |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00010273-001 | 16/03/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 12/07/2017
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and/or Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969 following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the dispute.
Background:
The complainant was forced to retire on his 65th birthday. Other employees were retained after that date. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant retired on his 65th birthday with 37 years service from his position as a plumber in a hospital. His union argued unsuccessfully that he should be retained as this opportunity had been afforded to many other employees within the particular catchment area of the HSE. The Public Service Stability Agreement 2018 – 2020 has acknowledged the issues which have arisen with the mandatory retirement age and are presently reviewing the current statutory and operational considerations giving rise to barriers to extended participation in the public service including the issue of the retirement age. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The complainant’s contract specifies a retirement age of 65. Up until 2011 it was a practice that some staff were re-employed after they retired within the HSE generally. This practice ceased following objections by the unions who argued that new staff should be employed due to the high unemployment rates. The respondent along with other bodies in the HSE was directed to finish all retiree contracts and not to offer any more unless special circumstances existed and these were to be approved individually at a senior level within the HSE. Where staff were re-employed after that date it was due to staff shortages in certain grades. Any such staff were re-employed on the minimum of the ‘new entrants’ scale. The complainant’s role was not considered to be a scarce grade. The Public Service Stability Agreement has now addressed this issue and the review should be completed shortly |
Findings and Conclusions:
Section 6.4.1 of the Public Service Stability Agreement states that ‘the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, with Public Service Employers, was tasked to review the current statutory and operational considerations giving rise to barriers to extended participation in the public service workforce up to and including the current and planned age of entitlement to the Contributory State Pension. This review is expected to be completed shortly.’ Section 6.4.2 states ‘In the context of this review, the parties have noted the strong views expressed by the staff side that the issues raised for employees caused by the prevailing maximum mandatory retirement ages in the public service need to be addressed as soon as possible. Future policy in this area will be considered by Government. In this regard, the staff side will be consulted in relation to any proposals proposed by Government.’ The issue of mandatory retirement age is a complex one requiring detailed consideration. The above agreement, although not yet implemented, commits to dealing with the issue in a consultative process with both employers and unions. The priority given to the issue will be a matter for these parties to pursue. An undue delay in concluding this issue could give rise to many individual hardship cases and possible equality issues. In the meantime, before the relevant issues of concern in altering the existing arrangements have been properly addressed, it would not be appropriate to accede to continued employment past the contracted retirement age, or re-employment thereafter, on demand. |
Recommendation:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
Having examined the evidence at the hearing I do not find any compelling evidence to uphold the complaint and the claim to have the complainant reinstated and compensated is rejected.
|
Dated: 22 August 2017
Key Words:
Retirement age. Re-employment |