ADJ-00002751

ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00002751

Complaint(s)/Dispute(s) for Resolution:

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 12/09/2016

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael Hayes

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and the abovementioned Act, following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).

Complainant’s Submission and Presentation:

The complainant submits that the respondent has refused to consider her legitimate grade claim under its grievance procedure. In particular she has been employed at grade 2 level since the end of January 2014. A grade 3 post was filled in the previous June and the post holder availed of sick leave and career break from January 2014 returning on a half time basis in August 2015. That position was filled to March 2015 by an agency worker who was paid at grade 3 rate. The complainant covered most of the grade 3 work in conjunction with her own duties from March to October 2015. At that point another agency worker was engaged and she worked under the complainant’s supervision until May 2016. She discovered that the agency worker was being paid at grade 3 rate in March 2016 and raised the matter internally to be advised that there was nothing that the respondent could do. She was further advised that the respondent would not deal with the matter through its internal grievance procedure. The complainant is performing 12 of the 15 Main Duties outlined in the grade 3 job description and supervises the work of a grade 3. She is not requesting an increase in her existing rate of pay she merely seeks the application of the existing grade and rate for the role she is performing. The authority of the Labour Court (AD1242 and LCR20616) is relied upon to advance the case.

Respondent’s Submission and Presentation:

The respondent submits that the complainant applied for and was successful in obtaining her current grade 2 position effective from 20^th of January 2014. She has since raised the issue of the appropriateness of her grade and approval has been sought from the Department of Education and Skills to conduct a job evaluation without success. It is the respondent’s position is that in the absence of a job evaluation that the job is properly evaluated as at January 2014. It is acknowledged institutionally that no job evaluation can be undertaken in the absence of Departmental approval.

Decision:

I note that the respondent did not demur from the submission that the complainant has been doing the work previously performed by her higher graded colleague or that she supervised another colleague who was graded above her. I further note that it has argued that the complainant can only be promoted as a result of a job evaluation and that it has declined to consider the matter under its grievance procedure as it deems it inappropriate to do so.

Having considered the circumstances described by the parties and having regard to the authorities quoted I recommend that the claimant be placed on the grade 3 salary scale with retrospective effect from January 2016.

Dated:   7^th February 2017