ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00014550
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Carpenter | A University |
Representatives | Connect Trade Union |
|
Dispute:
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00018974-001 | 04/05/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 08/03/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969 following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the dispute.
Background:
The worker claims that he worked compulsory, regular-recurring overtime and that this should have been included in his pension calculations. |
Summary of Worker’s Case:
The worker worked as a carpenter since 1968 until his retirement in June 2018. During his employment he was required to conduct general maintenance of the buildings on Saturdays on a regular basis. It was not possible to do this work on the other days as the buildings were occupied.
It was detailed that this meets the terms of Circular Letter S12/91 regarding Superannuation – Overtime which sets out under Section 4 that to qualify for superannuation purposes, work must have been “…work of a regular and recurring nature (i.e. that the particular officer of employee was required to perform the duties during specified hours on specified days).
The worker outlined that the work could not have been performed within the normal hours and it did not fluctuate.
Labour Court recommendation: AD1480 and LCR21262, LCR21463 were presented to support the worker’s claim |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The employer did not dispute the regular, compulsory nature of the recurring work that the worker performed.
It was detailed that the employer has no discretion in relation to the pay-out of pension entitlements and that the decision rests with a Government Department. It was confirmed by the employer that they administer the pension scheme |
Findings and Conclusions:
I have given careful consideration to the submissions of both parties. I find that the worker worked regular, compulsory, rostered overtime on a Saturday that could not be carried out in the normal course of his employment and that this did not fluctuate and meets the terms of Circular Letter S.12/91.
I recommend that the worker’s dispute satisfies the criteria of Circular Letter S12/91 and that the employer should forward the worker’s file to the relevant Government department so that the worker’s pension entitlement is recalculated to reflect the regular rostered overtime that was performed. |
Decision:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I recommend that the worker’s dispute satisfies the criteria of Circular Letter S12/91 and that the employer should forward the worker’s file to the relevant Government department so that the worker’s pension entitlement is recalculated to reflect the regular rostered overtime that was performed.
|
Dated: 7th May 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Key Words:
Industrial relations act, pension, overtime |