FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : RSA INSURANCE IRELAND LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY IBEC) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY UNITE THE UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer Recommendation No. ADJ-00007561.
BACKGROUND:
2. This matter was referred to an Adjudication Officer for investigation and Recommendation. On the 12 July 2018 the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation:-
- “I recommend that the respondent make a payment of €3,000 (say three thousand euro) to the complainant by way of restoration of good faith between the parties on the one hand and the amelioration of the disappointment created on the other”
The Worker appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on 21 August 2018 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
A Labour Court hearing took place on 9 October 2018.
DECISION:
The Court has given very careful consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties.
It is common case that the Appellant received a letter from the Respondent dated 30thJuly 2015 and a further letter dated 5thAugust 2015 advising him that he was to be placed on reward level 5 at a salary of €31,000. The Appellant had been employed by the Respondent since 2009 and, in August 2015, was in receipt of a salary of €28,000 approximately.
The Appellant was advised that the new salary level would take effect from 1stOctober 2015. However, the Respondent advised the Appellant on 4thSeptember 2015 that the salary adjustment earlier advised would not now proceed. The Respondent advised the Court that the notification in July / August of a salary adjustment to the Appellant was an error. The Appellant, through his Trade Union, confirmed that he did not accept that an error occurred.
The Court finds that the experience of the Appellant was extremely unsatisfactory and accepts that he had reasonably believed for a period of some weeks in 2015 that his salary would increase on 1stOctober 2015. That expectation was, in the event, not met. The Court finds that the Respondent was entirely responsible for this unfortunate sequence of events.
The Court notes that the Appellant was never in receipt of the expected salary increase and that no change occurred to his role at that time or since.
In all of the circumstances the Court concludes that it would be a disproportionate response to what occurred to require the Respondent to now institute the salary increase referred to in the letters of July and August 2015. The Court takes account of the fact that the Appellant was advised in advance of the notified implementation date that the Respondent would not, for reasons which were disputed before the Court, be proceeding with the salary increase.
In all of the circumstances the Court Recommends that the Appellant be compensated for the unfortunate sequence of events and the understandable disappointment that he suffered in 2015. The Court measures the amount of compensation which is fair and equitable as €3,000 and Recommends that this amount should be paid to the Appellant in final settlement of his claim.
The decision of the Adjudication Officer, which the Court notes was not appealed by the Respondent, is affirmed.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
LS______________________
25 October 2018Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Louise Shally, Court Secretary.