FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Geraghty Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Hall |
1. A claim for a contract of indefinite duration for three days per week.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case concerns a claim by the Worker that she be issued with a contract of indefinite duration for her longstanding working practice of three days per week.
The Employer noted that the Worker’s three day week consisted of two, separate contracts. One was for one day per week. The other was for a specified purpose for two days per week. That specified purpose was no longer applicable. The Worker is currently on a temporary, wholetime contract. A guarantee, as sought, of a return to a three day week work pattern at the end of the Worker’s current contract is not possible as there is not a suitable post available at present.
The Worker said that she has been employed for 17 years on fixed-term contracts.The Worker is currently on a wholetime three year contract. Given the background, she should be entitled to a guarantee of a return to a three day week work pattern when this contract concludes in 2022.
On 3 December 2019, the Union on behalf of the Worker referred the dispute to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.
A Labour Court hearing took place on 4 June 2020.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Worker has worked for the Employer since 2002 and has a blemish free track record.
2. In 2006 the Worker was issued with a contract of indefinite duration for one day per week.
3.The Worker is currently on a wholetime 3 year contract. Given the background, she should be entitled to a guarantee of a return to a three day week work pattern when this contract concludes in 2022.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Worker commenced employment in 2002 on two separate fixed-term contracts, for two distinct roles.
2. Despite the length of time that the Worker has held the two day job share role,it was for a specified purpose that is no longer applicable.
3.There is no suitable post to enable a guarantee to be given and the Employer is subject to the control of staff numbers by the Department of Education.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considerable sympathy for the Worker’s wish for some certainty, having worked for the Employer for a total of 18 years.
The Court recognises the difficulties for the Employer in providing absolute certainty that the Worker can return to a three day week work pattern when her current full time contract concludes.
The Court recommends that the parties engage in a formal system of regular, on-going contact throughout the duration of the Worker’s current contract, with a view to examining all possible solutions that might be available to facilitate the Worker in ensuring that her needs are accommodated when her current contract concludes.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom Geraghty
CR______________________
17 June, 2020Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.