FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HEALTH SERVICE EXECUTIVE SOUTH - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY INMO) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Ms Connolly Worker Member: Ms Treacy |
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer's RecommendationADJ-00008543
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns the Union's appeal of Adjudication Officer's Recommendation ADJ-00008543. The dispute relates specifically to the Worker's claim that she was treated in an inequitable manner by her employer and suffered significant financial and personal consequences as a result of this. The matter was referred to an Adjudication Officer for investigation and recommendation. On the 1st February 2018, the Adjudication Officer issued his Recommendation as follows:
"Based on the findings I recommend that the Claimant should continue to receive the same entitlements (grade and pay) she had as Interim Director of Nursing on a red circle basis for a period of 2 years. However should the claimant be successful applying for and obtaining a similar post the grade and rate for that position take precedence at that stage".
On the 8th March, 2018 the Union 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 12th September, 2018.
DECISION:
The Court has given careful consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties.
The matter before the Court arises as a result of a series of uncommon events. Ultimately the complainant’s appointment as a temporary director of nursing (DON) was terminated and she returned to work as a senior staff nurse. She had been offered appointments as a CNM1 or CNM2 following the termination of her appointment as a DON but she refused those offers of appointment for reasons she outlined to the Court.
The Court finds that the treatment of the Complainant was entirely unsatisfactory and that the basis for the termination of her temporary appointment was questionable in the prevailing circumstances.
The effect of these developments has been to cause a loss of earnings to the Complainant and also to cause her to suffer negative personal and professional impacts.
In all of the circumstances the Court recommends that the Complainant should be compensated in respect of both her financial loss and the distress suffered by her arising from her removal from the role of DON in the manner she was so removed.
The Court recommends that compensation for financial loss should be to the Complainant calculated on the basis of 1.5 times the actual annual loss she has suffered.
In addition, the Court recommends that she should receive a payment of €7,500 as compensation for the personal and professional negative effects she has suffered.
The decision of the Adjudication Officer is varied.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
1st October 2018______________________
SCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.