FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HSE - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY INMO) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Treacy |
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer's Recommendation ADJ-00011398
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns the Claimant's appeal ofAdjudication Officer's Recommendation ADJ-00011398. The dispute relates specifically to the Claimant's claim for regrading of her role from CNM3 to ADON band 1 retrospectively from October 2014 when the Claimant officially took up her current post in the Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC). The Employer rejects the Claimant's claim. The matter was referred to an Adjudication Officer for investigation and recommendation. On the 4th July 2018, the Adjudication Officer issued his Recommendation as follows:
"Having considered the arguments presented at the hearing and from reading the submissions presented by both parties I must agree with the Respondent. To do otherwise could, as pointed out by the Respondent, create a dangerous precedent and would be unfair.
For the reasons outlined above the complaint fails".
On the 13th August, 2018 the Claimant appealed the Adjudication Officer's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 17th October, 2018.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union on behalf of its member contends that the Claimant should not be at a financial loss as a result of her promotion.
2. The Union maintains that the Claimant is carrying out a national role like her counterpart who is appropriately classified as ADON Band 1.
3. The Claimant is seeking retrospective regrading of her role from CNM3 to ADON Band 1.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Claimant competed successfully and was promoted to the position of ADON Band 11 which was clearly advertised by the Employer.
2. The Claimant could only be regraded to the position of ADON Band 1 through open and transparent competition conducted by the National Recruitment Service.
3. The Employer is not in a position to concede the Claimant's claim.
DECISION:
This is an appeal by an employee of an Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation which found against her claim to be appointed to the salary scale applicable to ADON Band I when she was successfully promoted to the role of Infection Control Nurse which is paid at a salary level of ADON Band II.
In 2014 the Claimant was released from her role as CNM3 to take up the position as Infection Control Nurse on a temporary basis. She was paid a specialist qualification allowance in addition to the CNM3 salary. The Union on behalf of the Claimant submitted that she has been disadvantaged by her promotion as her earnings are lower by virtue of the loss of her allowance.
When she was successful in the competition for the substantive post, which was graded at ADON Band II she sought a starting salary appropriate to ADON Band I level or to retain the allowance she was on at the time as otherwise she would suffer a loss in earnings on her promotion.
Management refused as it was prohibited by the recruitment process which was an open and transparent process through the National Recruitment Service. It submitted that if the Union wish to pursue its contention that the role of Infection Control Nurse should be remunerated at a higher level than ADON Band II level, then that claim should be pursued through national negotiation in line with current industrial relations practice.
The Court has considered the submissions of both parties and notes that the Union is seeking a regrading of the role as it maintained that it should more appropriately be graded at ADON Band I level. The Union argued this point on the basis,inter alia, that the role is a national post in the Health Protection Surveillance Centre and therefore not appropriate to a non-Band grade which is more applicable to smaller sized hospitals.
Having considered the submissions before the Court, it is of the view that the Complainant applied for an advertised position with a ADON Band II salary and as this salary does not attract a specialist qualification allowance then the Court cannot recommend in favour of her claim. On that basis the Court rejects the Union’s appeal.
However, the Court is of the view that if the Union wish to pursue a regrading claim at national level then the HSE should facilitate such a review as expeditiously as possible and in the event that the review decides that the appropriate level for the post is at ADON Band I, as claimed by the Union, then the Claimant’s salary should be paid at that level retrospective to the date she accepted the offer for the advertised position, on 25thNovember 2015.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
1st November 2018______________________
SCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.