ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00011864

Parties: 

DISPUTE

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 06/06/2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Rosaleen Glackin

Procedure:

In accordance with 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969 andfollowing 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 is employed by the Respondent as a Social Worker. The Complainant referred a dispute to the Workplace Relations Commission on 14th November 2017 in relation to her status as a Social Worker.

SUMMARY OF COMPLAINANT’S POSITION.

The Complainant is employed as a Social Worker since 2008. He commenced work in a specified location in Adult Mental Health Services. He qualified to be appointed as a Senior Social Worker in 2016. He has accumulated 3 years post graduate experience – he is working in a specialised environment i.e. mental health and has been working single handedly – not reporting to a team leader but reports to a Principal Social Worker since 2013.

The Complainant has raised the issue in relation to his regrading since March 2017. The Complainant set out in detail the duties he performs which equate to that of a Senior Social Worker and such duties are not carried out by the basic Social Worker Grade. The Complainant also replaced a Senior Social Worker in his current location in October 2013. There has been an exchange of emails between the Parties including support from named seniors in the field. There was no agreement and the issue was referred to the WRC.

The Union identified a Rights Commissioner Decision of 2010 and a Labour Court Decision AD 1242 in support of their argument where both Decisions found in favour of the Complainant in that case, in similar circumstances.

SUMMARY OF RESPONDENT’S POSITION.

The Complainant is employed as a Social Worker and he commenced employment in the (Named) Mental Health Service in September 2013. He works as part of a multidisciplinary team and he reports to a Principal Social Worker. The Social Work cohort within Mental Health Services have an agreement reached on foot of the Report of the Expert Group whereby positions designated as single handed will be entitled to an upgrading subject to conditions i.e. attaining 3 years experience within the specialist area. The Agreement was provided to the Hearing. The Respondent argued the Complainant does not work in a single handed post. The Respondent also referenced a Labour Court Recommendation of 2006 in support of their argument where the Court upheld the Respondent’s position.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS.

There was a Report from the Expert Group of Various Health Professionals in 2001. There was also an Interim Report of National Social Workers Forum of May 2001 and involved a named Government Department, a named Health Service and IMPACT Trade Union. This provides at Section 4 – Upgrading of Single-Handed Posts as follows – “…It was further agreed that the (named) Health Services would write to health agencies requesting that they identify any single-handed social work posts which would merit an upgrading based on existing criteria”,

In a letter of clarification from the Health Services to IMPACT dated 27th November 2002 it states as follows – “I refer to recent enquiries to this office regarding the criteria to apply in respect of senior single handed posts. In Order to merit consideration for upgrading to same, the following criteria must be met -1.Three years post qualification experience. 2. Working single-handedly (not reporting to team leader) 3. Working in a specialised area”.

Both Parties confirmed that the Complainant met criteria 1 and 3 of this letter dated 27th November 2002. The area of dispute between the Parties relates to the second criteria i.e. working single-handedly (not reporting to team leader). Both Parties confirmed that there is no Team Leader in the Complainant’s location of work. Both Parties also confirmed that when the Complainant commenced in September 2013 she did replace a Senior Social Worker.

I note that despite the Labour Court Recommendation NO 18766 of 9th November 2006 that the Parties should engage at a national level in relation to the criteria to be applied across the Regions, there was no evidence presented to the Hearing that the criteria had altered since the letter of clarification issued in November 2002.

I find that the Complainant has met the criteria outlined in the letter from the Respondent dated 27th November 2002.

RECOMMENDATION.

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute. On the basis of the evidence, my findings above and in accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, I recommend that the Complainant be upgraded to Senior Social Worker effective from the date he qualified in respect of the criteria in 2016. This upgrading to be implemented by the Respondent within 42 days of the date of this Recommendation.

Dated:   14th August, 2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Rosaleen Glackin

Key Words: