ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00019773
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Worker | A Third Level College |
Representatives | SIPTU |
|
Complaint:
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-00026210-001 | 11/02/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/11/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts1969 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 is seeking the same terms that apply to other workers who correct ‘exams’. |
Summary of Worker’s Case:
The worker details that she was approved by a Dean to correct exams and it was her understanding that she was eligible to the same terms as others, for this additional work.
Copies of emails regarding her grievance, which has been ongoing were provided and the only response which she has received is that the work been incorporated into her job and she has no entitlement but has received no explanation as to why.
|
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The employer withdrew their preliminary issue that the claim was out of time and accepted that there had been significant delays in processing the worker’s grievance.
The employer apologised to the worker for the delays in dealing with her grievance.
It was detailed that the worker’s contract does not make specific reference to an entitlement to payments associated with the role of internal examiner.
The employer raised questions around whether the type of work in relation to the “exam correctors” is similar/like work to others who receive payment.
It was outlined that Haddington Road Agreement mentions specifically academic staff when it references exam payments (under Exam Payments - All Academic Staff) and that the worker is not an academic staff. |
Findings and Conclusions:
It was accepted by both parties that not all “work” associated with correcting students work, attracts payment under the Exam Correction Payment . It was also accepted that some academic staff, owing to their senior roles, are not eligible for the Exam Correction Payment. The worker is not considered to be in such a senior role.
The employer apologised for the lengthy delays in dealing with her grievance.
I recommend as follows: A review should take place to determine if the worker corrects ‘exams’ as defined under the Exam Correction Payment scheme. If her work meets this criteria then the workers claim should succeed. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute
I recommend as follows: A review should take place to determine if the worker corrects ‘exams’ as defined under the Exam Correction Payment scheme. If her work meets this criteria then the workers claim should succeed. |
Dated: 7th April 2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Key Words:
Industrial relations act |