ADJ-00006112

ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00006112

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	An Employee	A County Council

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-00008392-001	25/11/2016

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 07/02/2017

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael Hayes

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 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).

Background:

The respondent employed the complainant for a period of almost 26 years. He retired from service as a station officer on the 26^th of September 2016. The dispute concerns the interpretation and application of reckonable service for the purpose of calculation of retirement gratuity. The dispute was notified to the WRC on the 25^th of November 2016 and the parties made written and oral submission to the hearing. The parties were requested to provide additional information post hearing and neither did so. I note that the trade union did confirm that the complainant was not in a position to furnish the detail referred to at hearing and that the respondent failed to produce a copy of the signed document displayed at hearing.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The complainant submits that having suffered unnecessary delay in the processing of his retirement gratuity payment it was deemed that a substantial portion of his service (unpaid sick leave from 1^st of March 2015 until date of retirement) was not reckonable for that purpose. Having pressed the respondent in this regard it provided a number of documents (Managing Attendance Plan and two circulars related to retirement age) neither of which refers to portions of service to be excluded. The complainant asserts that others have been treated differently in respect of the inclusion of unpaid sick leave for the purpose of calculation of retirement gratuity.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The respondent submits that it has applied the correct criteria in the calculation of the complainant’s retirement gratuity in line with practice nationally. Reckonable service for pension purposes across the public service means paid service and does not include periods of unpaid leave including unpaid sick leave or sick leave paid at pensionable rate.

Recommendation:

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.

Noting that the parties have not furnished the documentation referred to above and the fact that I do not believe that anything turns on that fact I am satisfied that the respondent has applied the correct and universal interpretation of service for the purpose of the retirement gratuity in this case. I am not in a position to make a favourable recommendation in behalf of the complainant as it would have collective effect. I so recommend.

Dated: 17^th July 2017

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael Hayes