FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : AN POST - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Haugh Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Hall |
1. Referral of a dispute to the Labour Court pursuant to section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Employee referred a dispute to the Labour Court on 21 May 2019 pursuant to section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 20 December 2019. The following is the Court's Determination:
RECOMMENDATION:
In Recommendation LCR21563, dated 5 September 2017, which was accepted by both the Unions and An Post (‘the Company’), the Court recommended that the Parties engage in relation to additional efficiency measures in order to fund a pay increase which the Unions were seeking at the time.
The Worker in this dispute is employed in the Finance section based at the Company’s Dublin headquarters. In the context of the efficiency measures referred to above, the Company proposed that three Level 3 posts in the section in which the Worker is employed should be reduced to two posts, allowing the third employee to avail herself of the Company’s Voluntary Severance scheme. The two remaining employees (including the Worker), supported by their Union – the Association of Higher Civil and Public Servants (‘the AHCPS’) – submitted that the posts they held should be regraded to a higher grade.
This matter was then referred to the independent Monitoring Group previously appointed by the Court. The Monitoring Group, having considered submissions from both sides, issued its determination on 26 October 2018 to the effect that both employees should receive an immediate red-circled pay increase of €2,000.00 per annum and that both posts should be evaluated by Hay Consultants, using the standard job evaluation process in place. In the event that the roles were evaluated higher than was the case at the time (including the additional €2,000.00 per annum) the employees should have their pay increased. In any event, the €2,000.00 increase per annum was to remain in place, regardless of the outcome.
The outcome of job evaluation process was that one of the posts should remain at Level 3 and the other should be regraded to Level 4. Neither employee accepted the outcome and the Union indicated that it would refer the matter back to the Monitoring Group, as provided for in LCR21563. However, both employees opted instead to refer the matter to the Adjudication Service of the Workplace Relations Commission pursuant to section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. The Company exercised its discretion under that section not to have the matter investigated by an Adjudication Officer. The employees then attempted to have the matter dealt with by the Conciliation Service of the Workplace Relations Commission. The Company again declined to have the dispute dealt with in that process.
The Worker then referred a dispute to the Court pursuant to section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. The Court heard submissions from both Parties at a hearing on 20 December 2019.
Discussion and Recommendation
At the hearing before the Court, both Parties told the Court that they were agreeable to have this matter referred back to the Monitoring Group which has at all times indicated its availability and willingness to consider any issues that remained outstanding following the job evaluation process. The Court recommends accordingly that the Worker’s issues arising from the outcome of the Hay’s evaluation be conclusively and fully considered by the Monitoring Group by no later than 28 February 2020. The Court also recommends that the Company provide the Worker with a full copy of the evaluation report that relates to his individual post.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
RK______________________
06/01/20Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Richard Kennedy, Court Secretary.