FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : DUBLIN AND DUN LAOGHAIRE EDUCATION AND TRAINING BOARD (REPRESENTED BY IBEC) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY RICHARD GROGAN & ASSOCIATES, SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms O'Donnell Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Hall |
1. Class of PRSI contributions.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case concerns a claim by the Worker that he should be given service credit for the period May to September 1995 as his P45 did not issue until September 1995.
The Employer's said the Worker was employed on a temporary contract and his employment ceased when the course finished in May 1995.
On the 21 August 2018, the Worker referred the dispute to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 31 October 2018.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Worker was employed by the City of Limerick V.E.C for the academic year 1994 to 1995.
2. The teaching hours like all other teachers ceased once the classes finished their courses in May of 1995. The employee was neither laid off nor terminated.
3. The Worker then obtained a contract with Dun Laoghaire V.E.C. The Worker contends that this should be treated simply as the transfer from one V.E.C to another rather than a new employment. This would entitle him to be on Class D PRSI.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. During the Workers employment with the City of Limerick V.E.C he was paying Class A PRSI.He was not a permanent employee, he was part-time and was not admitted to the pension scheme or pay pension contributions.
2. He moved to Dun Laoghaire V.E.C, a separate legal entity.
3. He was appointed to a whole-time teaching post on 1 July 1997 at which point he was admitted to the pension scheme, however he continued to pay Class A PRSI in line with Article 84 of S.I. No 312 of 1996.
RECOMMENDATION:
This case was referred under s 20 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (the Act). The issue in dispute between the parties relates to the PRSI classification of the Worker going back to September 1994 linked to a change of Employment in and around that period. There has been sporadic engagement with the Employer in relation to the issue in 1996, 2001 and 2014. For the Court to have jurisdiction to hear a complaint under the Act there must be a Trade Dispute. Section 3 of the Industrial Relations Act 1946 defines a Trade Dispute as
“the expression “trade dispute” means any dispute or difference between employers and workers or between workers and workers connected with the employment or non-employment, or the terms of the employment, or with the conditions of employment, of any person”
While there is no time limit in the legislation it is difficult to understand how sporadic engagement on an issue over a 20 year period could constitute a Trade Dispute. On that basis it is the view of the Court that no Trade dispute exists and therefore it does not have jurisdiction to hear the case.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Louise O'Donnell
CR______________________
4 December, 2018Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.