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-00027062-001

14/03/2019

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

CA-00027063-001

14/03/2019

This case concerns a claim by the worker that he should be placed on the College Lecturer pay scale as per his previous fixed term contracts. The claim is under the Industrial Relations Act 1969-2001.

Background:

The Worker is employed by the Respondent University since 1998. At that time, he was employed as Assistant Lecture/Researcher on a number of fixed term contracts in the Mechanical Engineering School. Even through all the workers qualifications are not equal to a Phd, we believe that the functions carried out by the claimant are akin to those of a College Lecture.

The Worker has been carrying out the duties (both research and lecturing) for the past 20 years which are reflected within the contract of employment.

In 2010, the worker was issued with a contract of indefinite duration, however, the employer in confirming his right under the operation of law failed to apply the salary scale that would be associated with the role.

In the last 20 years the worker has carried out additional duties which are not defined within the contract of employment and of a higher value. All these duties are not reflected in the worker’s salary.

The duties included:-

Up to 8 hours per week classroom/language teaching related work within a clear and established programme in accordance with the modular timetable with prior induction and on-going work including the following:-

•             Assessment of student progress and provision of feedback

•             Reflective approach to practice and self-development

•             Contribute to the development of Language Teaching materials

•             Routine administrative duties

•             Under supervision contribute to examining

However, since 2010, the Worker’s role has developed and expanded to the extent he now believes she is performing and carrying out the role, duties and functions of a College Lecturer.

The worker approached SIPTU to make representations to the respondent on his behalf, because while he was assured by the Head of School that there was an acceptance of transformation of his role since 2010, and it seems the Head was supportive of this, no progress was made on a new pay scale/job description to adequately remunerate him for the substantially changed role.

The Worker over the course of his career made significant contributions to the respondent in both publications and lectures. The first publication in 2007, “The Natural Presenter” and in 2017, “Awful Presentations”.

The Worker is adamant that the functions she now carries out are akin to that of College Lecturer.

It’s worth noting that the employee commenced employment in 1998, however, the employer only issued the CID in 2010.

While we accept that were not here under the Fixed Term Act 2003, had the employer issued the Contract of Indefinite Duration the claimant terms and conditions of employment would have reflected an incremental salary scale.

Given that the Respondent accept and acknowledge that the claimant is now carrying out a far higher level of responsibility and when the Job Description is examined as to the requirements for those higher duties we believe those duties and responsibilities will be comparable to lecturer grade and the claimant be placed on the appropriate pay scale.

The claimant is seeking a pay scale to be applied to him.

In his engagement with the respondent, he sought to be placed on the College Lecturer pay scale. He has claimed that he is performing the role of a Lecturer. This has been refused as the claimant is not a College Lecturer. The College Lecturer pay scale is 33,479 to 58,760 Euros per annum.

The claimant is currently paid 53,435 Euros per annum.

The claimant is employed as a Research Engineer in the Mechanical Engineering School. This is not an academic role. For example, it was not requirement when the claimant applied for the role that the applicant have a PhD. The claimant still does not have a PhD. An applicant for a College Lecturer post on the other hand must possess a PhD or be in the process of acquiring one. If one does not have a PhD at the time of application, then the appointment is always subject to the applicant obtaining a PhD prior to appointment.

The claimant was in a fixed-term role that was due to finish in July 2009. When this contract was made permanent in July 2009 there was no change to his existing terms and conditions of employment.

Background:

On December 7, 2017 a grievance meeting on this matter took place attended by the claimant, his shop steward, the Head of School, Mechanicals & Materials Engineering, Professor TG, with a person from HR attending in a secretarial capacity.

At the meeting the claimant stated that he believed that he was performing a role equivalent to that of a Lecturer. He accepted that he did not have a PhD and that this was an obvious deficiency compared to those employed as Lecturers.

The claimant stated that he did not see any difference between his role and that that of a Lecturer. He claimed that he did research, lecturing, looks after the Laboratory Review Licences and the Measurement Hardware.

At the meeting he was asked about pursuing a PhD in his area of interest (i.e. communications) he stated that he was interested in doing this but that it was unreasonable to require him to have one.

He stated that there was no change in his role when he moved from temporary to permanent employee status in 2009.

On January 5, 2018 the claimant was written to by Professor TG with the outcome of his grievance hearing. In his letter rejecting the claimant’s application to be paid on a College Lecturer scale Professor TG states:

•          The claimant was not involved in research and innovation.   Whilst he did assist academics to         obtain research funding and supported their research activities this is not akin to having the necessary research profile needed to fulfil this element of the academic requirements to be a Lecturer. Lecturers must lead research activities, publish scholarly research and win autonomous research funding. Neither did the claimant’s role equate to being an independent Principal Investigator I.e. the academic responsible for seeking industry funding and is the manager and driver of a research project once funding is obtained.

•          It is no longer the practice to appoint someone without a PhD to a Lecturer position. This has been the practice for many years in UCD

•             The claimant had accepted a contract of indefinite duration with a fixed salary point.

•             The University offered to support the claimant in pursuing a PhD

The claimant appealed Professor TG’s decision to Professor KF, College Principal, College of Engineering and Architecture.

On February 20, 2018 the claimant met with Professor KF.

At this meeting the claimant made it clear that accessing a pay scale was his issue. It was not about being called a Lecturer.

He claimed that his work involved 75% teaching and 25% research. He had published 2 books, although they were not scholarly books.

On May 17, 2018 Professor KF issued his findings on the claimant’s grievance.

This letter states:

•             The claimant’s role is not equivalent to a Lecturer role.   A Lecturer spans the areas of research, scholarship and innovation, teaching and learning and leadership and contribution. The role of a Lecturer involves more extensive duties in these areas at a sustained level compared to the role performed by the claimant

•             The claimant’s engagement in leading research activity and developing and accessing research funding was very limited. Whilst he had been involved in projects involving Thermo King in the early 2000’s he has had very limited involvement in developing and accessing funding opportunities since then.

•             The 2 books he published did not fulfil the research, scholarship and innovation requirements of a Lecturing role within the School.

The claimant responded to Professor KF’s letter stating that he would refer this matter to a third-party to determine whether his role met the specifications of a College Lecturer.

Respondent Case.

•             The claimant cannot be placed on a College Lecturer pay scale as he does not fulfil the requirements for such a role i.e. he does not have a PhD.

•             Any College Lecturer post advertised in the School since December 2017 and prior to the    referral of this case has required the applicants to have a PhD to be considered

•             The books he wrote do not fulfil the research, scholarship and innovation elements of a Lecturer role

•             As a research intensive University a key requirement is that a Lecturer engage in initiatives to seek research funding. Whilst the claimant supports others in their research he does not lead research activity

•             Of the 418 of staff in the College of Engineering and Architecture, 106 (25%) are not on a pay scale

•             The claimant is employed as a Research Engineer and of the 82 employed in the College in a research post 59 (over 70%) are not on a pay scale.

•             The University is prepared to assist the claimant to obtain a PhD which would clearly open up the opportunity to apply for and be considered for any College Lecturer role he was interested in

•             Putting the claimant on to a pay scale would have clear implications for other staff seeking to be treated in the same way.

For all of the above reasons the University is requesting that the Adjudicator reject this complaint.

Having carefully considered the evidence of both the Worker and the Employer, I am satisfied that the Worker does not meet the Employer’s requirements to be a Lecturer. One essential requirement is that the candidate have a PhD. The worker does not have a PhD. As the worker does not have a PhD he cannot be placed on the Lecturer’s pay scale. I am therefore not making any recommendation in this matter.

For the reasons set out above I am not making a recommendation in this matter.