ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00012317

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Anonymised Parties	School Teacher (Retired)	Government Department

Representatives

Complaint

Act	Complaint/Dispute Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991	CA-00016357-001	17/12/2017

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/03/2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Rosaleen Glackin

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.

Background:

The Complainant was employed from 1st August 1985 and the employment terminated on 1st October 2017. The Complainant referred a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission on 17th December 2017 alleging the Respondent had breached the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 – 2015. The Complainant had spent some years working , teaching, in Italy between 1987 to 1995 when she returned to work in Ireland. This is essentially a dispute between the Parties in relation to the application by the Department of the Collective Agreement on Incremental Credit and if it should apply to the Complainant.

The Complainant had lodged complaints with the Rights Commission Service under the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act, 2001 and a complaint under the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, 2003 which was heard on 15th October 2007 and a decision issued on 24th June 2009 in which the Rights Commissioner did not uphold the complaints. The Complainant appealed both Decisions to the Labour Court but these two appeals to the Labour Court were withdrawn by the Complainant on 20th April 2010.

This is a dispute between the Parties as to whether the Complainant is encompassed by a Collective Agreement.

PRELIMINARY ISSUES.

Time Limits – Section 41 (6) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 provides as follows - “ Subject to subsection (8), an adjudication officer shall not entertain a complaint under this section if it has been presented to the Director General after the expiration of the period of 6 months beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates”. Section 41(8) does allow for an extension of time “due to reasonable cause”. The Complainant returned to Ireland from Italy in 1995. She applied for incremental credit in October 1997 for the period between December 1987 and August 1995 under the Collective Agreement. The Complainant’s claim for incremental credit was refused by letter dated 19th November 1997 on the basis she did not satisfy the criteria of the Collective Agreement. The Terms of the Incremental Scheme for Teachers, was agreed at the Teachers Conciliation Council and has application to all teachers remunerated out of Oireachtas Funds. The Teachers Conciliation Council is the recognised forum for dealing with matters relating to pay and conditions of service for teachers and operates under the Revised Scheme of Conciliation and Arbitration for Teachers. The Complainant did lodge complaints under the Part Time 2001 Act and the Fixed Term Act of 2003, in 2006 and these were heard in October 2007 and a Decision issued in June 2009. These were appealed to the Labour Court by the Complainant in 2009 but these appeals were withdrawn by the Complainant in April 2010.

I find that the Complainant did not lodge her complaint under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 – 2015 until 17th December 2017 nearly 20 years after her application was refused on 19th November 1997.

Ongoing Contravention of the Act. The second issue to be considered is if the Complainant is alleging there is an ongoing contravention of the alleged breach of Section 5 of the Act. I find that no evidence was presented to me at the Hearing that the Respondent had made an unlawful deduction from the wages of the Complainant rather what was presented related to a dispute between the Parties as to whether the Complainant was entitled to be paid incremental credit from 1997 onwards arising from a Collective Agreement reached at the Teachers Conciliation Council. The Complainant was informed by letter dated 19th November 1997 that she did not meet the criteria of the Collective Agreement between the Parties to this Collective Agreement. I also note that the Complainant has not appealed this Decision of November 1997 internally under the Grievance Procedure.

Findings and Conclusions:

On the basis of the evidence I find that the Complainant does not have Locus Standi to bring a complaint as the Decision to reject her application for incremental credit for service in Italy was issued to the Complainant by letter dated 19th November 1997, some 20 years ago. Likewise, the Complainant has not established there was an unlawful deduction from her wages from 1997. The Complainant and the Respondent have both agreed that there is a dispute between the Parties concerning the application of a Collective Agreement concerning incremental credit for eligible service where it can be demonstrated that this service qualifies under the terms of the agreed scheme.

Decision:

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

In accordance with Section 41(5) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 I declare I do not have jurisdiction to hear this complaint as it does not comply with Section 41(6) or Section 41(8) of the Act.

Dated: 19/07/18

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Rosaleen Glackin

Key Words:

Section 41(6) and 41(8) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 – Alleged deduction not quantified as dispute concerning the application of a Collective Agreement.