FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : BROTHERS OF CHARITY SOUTHERN SERVICES (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Ms Connolly Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer Recommendation No. ADJ-00008191.
BACKGROUND:
2. This matter was referred to an Adjudication Officer for investigation and Recommendation. On the 10 November 2017 the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation:-
- “I find that the claimant has demonstrated a clear historical anomaly. I recommend that the Employer aligns the pay and work of the claimant with the established rate of pay for the job, that of Senior Instructor/Home Support Worker and places her on the appropriate point of the scale with immediate effect in full and final settlement of the claim.
- I have not found in favour of the claim for retrospection.”
The Employer appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on the 15 December 2017 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 10 May 2018.
DECISION:
The Court has given very careful consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties. The Trade Union contends that the Claimant, who is paid on the ‘basic instructor scale’ as a Home Support Worker, should be paid on the ‘Senior Instructor Grade’ scale. The Union claim is based on the contention that other staff carrying out the role of Home Support Worker are paid on the ‘senior’ scale.
The Court understands that there are five people in the South Lee ASD team who are Home Support Workers and who are carrying out roles which can be argued to be the same. The Court notes that there has not been an evaluation exercise carried out to assess this proposition but also notes that there is no clear dispute between the parties on this point.
Against that background the Court notes that, at the date of the hearing of the Court, two of the role holders were paid at the higher ‘Senior Instructor’ rate while three of the role holders were paid at the lower ‘basic instructor’ rate. The Court also notes that the qualification of the role holder has not been a determinant of pay rate to date.
In all of the circumstances, the Court concludes that the within dispute arises from the fact that no single rate of pay is in place for this role (Home Support Worker) in this particular service of the employer (the South Lee ASD service). The Court also concludes that, given the current pay profile of the five occupants of the role who may be carrying out the same duties, the current position of the Claimant cannot be seen to be unique in the team and therefore no resolution to the within dispute can be found by considering the position of the Claimant in isolation. The Court believes that the fundamental structural issue underlying this dispute requires to be addressed if the parties are to find agreement on the matter raised by the Claimant.
In those circumstances the Court recommends that the parties engage without delay to agree the appropriate rate of pay for the role of Home Support Worker in this service and to agree the assimilation arrangements to be applied to current job holders as a consequence of such an agreement. In the event of a failure to agree this matter locally the parties should engage through agreed procedures to bring the matter to a conclusion without delay.
The Adjudication Officer’s decision is set aside.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
LS______________________
17 May 2018Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Louise Shally, Court Secretary.