ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00014596
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | An Employee | An Airline |
Representatives | Peter Glynn SIPTU |
|
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-00019120-001 | 14/05/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 08/08/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Niamh O'Carroll Kelly
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969following 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:
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The worker was transferred as a Team Member A from the Cleaning Solutions Department to the Catering Department on 22 January, 2010. His functions were in the kitchen and as an assistant doing meal preparations. In September, 2013 the loading and catering section were amalgamated and the worker requested to be moved from kitchen to Loading and Catering Department. In September, 2013 the worker was offered a position of Catering Loader, Team Member B in the Catering Department. Due to restructuring within the Loading and Catering Department and the reduction in manning levels on the catering trucks, 2:1 the worker sought a transfer. He did so on 15th September 2016, due to safety concerns. On 13th October 2016 the worker redeployed to the Catering Workshop. Management of the Catering Department recognised the complainant as Team Leader B. In accordance with roster procedures, they roster to him with normal duties associated with Team Leader B in that area. The worker carried out his duties as Team Leader B an upholding and diligent manner up until October 2017. He was then advised by the Clearance Area Manager that he was to be paid in the future as a Team Member A. The worker rejected at the company's position and sought further clarity which wasn't forthcoming. The worker’s loss as a result of the unauthorised change amounts to €2, 258.40. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The worker has been employed by the respondent since April 2009 in the Catering Department. There are currently 258 employees in that department. The worker worked as a Catering Loader at Team Member B grade until 2016. In this role the worker was engaged in the loading and unloading of catering trucks at the respondent’s flight kitchen and then driving them airside to the relevant aircraft where the trucks are off loaded and reloaded. The worker’s Team Member B grade was directly associated with the loader role he performed with required driving duties. In 2016 the respondent introduced a new work practice in catering loading under which one employee would operate the loading trucks on the ramp. Over the summer of 2016 the worker approached the respondent to request a move to the flight clearance section of the catering department. The worker expressed an unwillingness to continue in his loading role. Following a number of conversations in relation to the issue in August 2016, the Head of Catering agreed to the claimant’s request to move section but advise the worker that he could not be released from the loading department until the end of the Summer season. At the time of approving the request the respondent advised the worker that he could not guarantee that he would retain his load upgrade of Team Member B as he was opting to move voluntarily to the clearance section which would be performing entry-level duties. A voluntary transfer from Team Member B to Team Member A grade should result in a salary adjustment commensurate with the role the individual is moving to. The only exception to this is where the transfer is in voluntary or as a consequence of organisational restructure. On account of the workers move out of loading, another employee who would have reverted to the Team Member A grade at the end of the Summer season remained, backfilling the workers job and grade of Team Member B. In October, 2016 the worker moved to the Clearance area of the Catering department where the dishwashing takes place. He continues to be employed in this section as a Team Member A grade. In October, 2017 it was brought to the company's attention that the worker had continue to receive payment as Team Member B level from October 2016 until October 2017 notwithstanding his move to the clearance department and the fact that he was now completing Team Member A duties. It was the Worker’s Union who informed the respondent. The respondent accept that this was an administrative error in so far as there was a breakdown in communication between the local business area and HR administration and the workers changing role was not appropriately recorded. Once this era was identified a letter was sent to the worker on 19 October 2017 confirming the error and overpayment that had taken place and advising him that the correct rate pay for a team member a scale was to be applied thereafter. The worker’s pay was amended from 29 October 2017. At all times the respondent has accepted responsibility for the error and as an act of good faith opted not to recover the overpayment of €2, 903.12. The worker is currently acting up on his short-term temporary basis to cover unplanned leave and increased operational volume at a Team Member B in the Catering Bond Department. He has been doing so since 15 July 2018 and is being paid a daily acting up allowance. |
Findings and Conclusions:
It is clear from the evidence that the respondent made an error when they continued to pay the worker at Team Member B rate after he had voluntarily moved to a Team Member A role. On the basis that the respondent has not and will not attempt to recoup the sum overpaid and because the worker had the benefit of the overpayment for a period of one year, I am not going to make any recommendation.
|
Decision:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
On the basis that the respondent has not and will not attempt to recoup the sum overpaid to the worker and because the worker had the benefit of the overpayment for a period of one year, I am not going to make any recommendation. |
Dated: 13-11-2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Niamh O'Carroll Kelly
Key Words:
|