ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00002849

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

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/11/2016

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emile Daly

Procedure: 

In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 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).

Attendance at Hearing: 

Complainant’s Submission and Presentation:

1. The Complainant has worked as a staff nurse with the same home care team, in the same place of work, since 2005.

2. In 2012 the Complainant completed her graduate diploma in palliative care and clinical practice. Since then she has worked as part of the palliative care team and carried out all the core duties and responsibilities as a Clinical Nurse Specialist (in palliative care)

3. Due to the moratorium on staff recruitment she is still graded as a staff nurse which is not that which her qualifications and duties reflects

4. She seeks to be regraded to be a CNS and seeks compensation to reflect her loss of earnings retrospectively until 1 October 2013.

Respondent’s Submission and Presentation: 

1. The Respondent accepts that the Complainant does work equal to work done by the other clinical nurse specialists in her workplace.

2. The Respondent accepts that the nature of her work and responsibility are not that of a staff nurse however due to the moratorium under the Haddington Road Agreement, the Respondent is prevented from appointing the Complainant as a CNS.

3. The Respondent states that, as no vacancy has arisen their hands are tied, in terms of recruitment

4. They accept the basis of a decision of the LRC, Rights Commissioner Recommendation R154897 – IR 15/JW, whereby the basis of equal pay for equal work was applied and the applicant was regraded as a CNS.

5. The Respondent is willing to accept the regrade on the basis that the Complainant fill a vacancy in a different location ( 45 km from where she works now)

6. The Respondents are willing to accept that the regrade applies retrospectively to the date of the precedent case, R154897 – IR 15/JW, 1 October 2013.

7. The Respondent are willing to compensate her in the sum of €8437.00, to reflect the regrade, retrospectively to 1 October 2013.

Recommendation :

Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

As much of the points raised in this complaint have been conceded by the Respondent, I am happy to declare the case to be well founded and make the following recommendation.

That the Complainant be regraded to a Clinical Nurse Specialist.

That her pay scale be rectified to reflect her new grade and that the agreed amount of €8437.00 be paid to the Complainant. The operational date being agreed as 1 October 2013.

The only issue which is not agreed between the parties is the Complainant’s place of work. In all the circumstances I recommend that the Complainant’s place of work remains as is, because there is a need for the Complainant to do the work that she is doing in that facility and when a vacancy did arise in her current place of work, the duties were all absorbed by those working there, so clearly her work is required there.

The regrade is on the basis that she can continue to do the same hours and terms of work as she currently enjoys.

The Complainant has for some time been performing the same duties and has the same responsibilities as all the other CNS in her current place of work. This should continue in the same place of work.

I agree with the recommendation R154897 – IR 15/JW and I apply the reasoning of that decision to this case.

Dated:   12^th January 2017