ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00006486
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | An Academic Co-ordinator | A Third Level Institution |
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-00008714-001 | 12/12/2016 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 16/03/2017
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 employs the complainant in an administrative grade4 position as an academic co-ordinator. She has been employed by the respondent in a number of different roles since 2005. The dispute concerns the alleged non-application of incremental credit to her current role for which she successfully applied and was appointed in 2016. Written and oral submission was made at hearing. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant submits that she was not granted incremental credit for her previous relevant service upon her appointment to her present post. She is aware of many persons being granted credit at grade 4 in line with Government policy in the matter. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent submits that the complainant is entering the administration stream for the first time in that her previous roles (containing an element of teaching) while remunerated at grade 3 administrative level are not analogous within the meaning of Government policy. Her previous roles were quasi academic involving mix of teaching and administration. Her current role is solely administrative and requires no teaching element. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Government policy provides that - “……new appointees to any grade will start at the minimum point of the scale. However, incremental credit may continue to apply for relevant recognised service”. The respondent has in part recognised the complainant’s previous service (she has not been assimilated at point 1 of the scale) to a limited extent by allowing her to remain on her current salary and preserving her incremental adjustment date. The Department of Education and Skills has stated that the relevant grades in this case are not analogous within the meaning of Clause 2.31 of the Haddington Road Agreement. It seems to me to be rather unfair that the administrative elements contained in the complainant’s previous roles are not seen as “analogous” and therefore not accountable. Nevertheless the Agreement provides priority right of interpretation to the DES as it relates to the interpretation of the word “analogous”. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act. Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I am not in a position to make a recommendation favourable to the complainant as petitioned. |
Dated: 26/10/17
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael Hayes