FULL RECOMMENDATION
CD/20/134
ADJ-00015351 CA-00020022
| DECISIONNO.LCR22249 |
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES :A RESEARCH GROUP
(REPRESENTED BY MASON HAYES & CURRAN)
- AND -
A WORKER
(REPRESENTED BY IFUT)
DIVISION :
| Chairman: | Mr Geraghty | | Employer Member: | Ms Doyle | | Worker Member: | Mr Bell |
SUBJECT:
1.Appeal Of Adjudication Officer Decision No. ADJ-00015351.
BACKGROUND:
2.The Worker was employed by the Company from 2010 to 2018. In 2018 there was a transfer of undertakings involving several staff to the National University of Ireland, Maynooth, now Maynooth University (MU). At the time of this transfer the Worker was in dispute with her employer. The Worker's claim is that she was not remunerated correctly for the work she was undertaking for her employer.
The matter was referred to the Labour Court and a hearing took place on 28 August 2020
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
The Worker should have been put on point 6 of the Grade 6 (Lecturers) pay scale in 2012, or at least in 2017/2018 based on - a)The responsibilities and scope of the role that the Worker had taken on in 2012 had grown considerably over the period from 2012 to 2016.
b)The employer submitted to the Adjudicator that there had been a ‘change of role’in 2012 as the program that the Worker was engaged on was closing in 2013, this is not the case as the program is still in place.
c)The Worker was assigned an ‘academic role’ in addition to a managerial role in the new ‘Capacity Development Services’ unit which now included the Overseas Training Program and several additional programs. The Worker remained on point 1 of the Grade 6 (Lecturer) pay scale despite taking on additional managerial responsibilities above those that would be expected of those on point 1 of this Grade 6.
d) A number of comparable colleagues are on point 6 of the Grade 6 pay scale.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
Salary scales were adopted by the Respondent in mid-2008.Employees were appointed to a grade on a salary scale associated with their roles.The Claimant is not entitled to more favourable treatment by moving up the salary scale when others could not due to a freeze on increments.
The Claimant accepted the CDS Manager job which was at Point 1 on the Grade 6 Academic salary scale.The Claimant fails to compare herself with like employees. The academic colleagues had considerably more academic teaching experience than the Claimant.
DECISION:
RecommendationThe Court notes that one of the parties was not in a position to indicate if they could resume discussions locally in order to determine if this matter could be resolved by agreement. In order to afford the parties an opportunity to establish if agreement is possible, the Court is willing to assist the parties by making an interim Recommendation and to defer making a definitive Recommendation until end September. The Court recommends that the parties enter discussions. The parties are requested to indicate to the Court before the end of September if agreement has been reached. In the event that agreement is not reached by that date, the Court will issue a definitive Recommendation.
 | Signed on behalf of the Labour Court | | | | Tom Geraghty | | NJ | ______________________ | | 02 SEPTEMBER 2020 | Deputy Chairman |
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Noel Jordan, Court Secretary. | 
