FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HIGHER EDUCATION AUTHORITY (REPRESENTED BY CLAIRE BRUTON, B.L., INSTRUCTED BY WHITAKER & CO., SOLICITORS - AND - A WORKER REPRESENTED BY GILVARRY AND ASSOCIATES SOLICITORS DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Hall |
1. Claim for restoration of professional added years to pension.
BACKGROUND:
2. On 10 September 2018, the Worker referred this 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 14 November 2018.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns a claim for the restoration of professional added years to the Claimant’s pension. The Claimant retired from the National University of Ireland Galway on 31st December 2010. On 6thSeptember 2018 the matter was referred to the Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969.
At the outset of the hearing the Court considered the issue of its jurisdiction to hear the case as the Claimant is retired from the workforce.
Prior to 1stAugust 2015, there was no provision in industrial relations law to hear a claim unless there was a trade dispute between a worker and an employer. The legal opinion at the time was that a retired person was not a “worker” within the meaning of Section 23 of the Industrial Relations Act 1990.
Since 2015 with the enactment of the Industrial Relations Act 2015 ("the 2015 Act") a retired person is now covered within the statutory meaning of the term “worker” and can be a party to a trade dispute. However, the circumstances in which an Adjudication Officer or the Court can investigate a trade dispute to which a retired person is a party is limited by Section 26A inserted in the 1990 Act, as follows :-
- S26A. (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this or any other enactment, but subject to subsection (2), an adjudication officer or the Court shall not investigate a trade dispute to which a worker who has ceased to be employed by reason of his or her retirement is a party unless—
- (a) the dispute was referred to the Commission for conciliation within a period of 6 months from the date on which the worker’s employment ceased, or the date on which the event to which the dispute relates occurred, whichever is the earlier, or
(b) the dispute was referred to an adjudication officer or, as the case maybe, the Court within the period referred to in paragraph (a).
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), an adjudication officer or, as the case may be, the Court may extend the period referred to in that subsection by a further period not exceeding 6 months where the adjudication officer or the Court is satisfied that the failure to refer the dispute within the period referred to in subsection (1) was due to reasonable cause. (3) The Commission or the Court shall not investigate a trade dispute to which a worker referred to in subsection (1) is a party where the dispute is subject to investigation by the Pensions Ombudsman. - (a) the dispute was referred to the Commission for conciliation within a period of 6 months from the date on which the worker’s employment ceased, or the date on which the event to which the dispute relates occurred, whichever is the earlier, or
Accordingly, as the Claimant retired in 2010 and referred her case to the Court in September 2018, the case is statute-barred and the Court has no jurisdiction to hear her case.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
LS______________________
27 November 2018Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Louise Shally, Court Secretary.