Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

An employee

A healthcare provider

Representatives

Mr Vernon Hegarty, SIPTU Workers Rights Centre

Management

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-00033680-001

09/01/2020

The employee was employed in July 2011 in the General Operative category and since mid-2012 has been carrying out administrative work for his employer.

The employee works in administration and is paid on a general operative pay grade.

In January 2012 the complainant was redeployed from the maintenance department to an administrative position that was anticipated to last for 6 months. Subsequently he was requested to work in another administration position and remains there to this date.

In March 2016 the complainant’s duties were expanded and increased his workload.

In March 2016 the employee wrote to his manager requesting a Clerical Officer grade for his post based on the clerical duties he was performing and continues to perform on a daily basis.

The employee wrote a second time to his manager in January 2017, but the matter was progressed.

A number of meetings have taken place, the matter has remained unresolved.

On 21st January 2019 a SIPTU Industrial Organiser emailed the employee’s manager requesting that he document the reasons and difficulties the employer had in upholding the employee’s claim for a clerical grade.

The matter was then referred to the Workplace Relations Commission on 9th January 2020.

Union’s position.

All the duties performed by the employee are duties previously performed by a Clerical Grade 3.

In March 2016 management requested the employee to take on the additional role of the supply of stationary and printing which entails ordering, emailing and control of stock. Prior to the employee taking on the responsibility for stationary stores these duties were carried out on a full-time basis by a Clerical Grade 4.

Despite the employee taking on the new admin role in 2016 he still remains on the General Operative pay scale which clearly does not reflect the duties he performs nor the responsibilities he has accepted.

The employee has been raising the issue of his pay scale formally since 10th March 2016 and performing administrative duties for over 8 years. In the interest of fairness, he should be receiving the appropriate remuneration and conditions of employment consistent with the role he fulfils and has been doing since June 2012. At the very least he should be paid on the Clerical Grade 3 pay scale.

The employer accepts that the complaint summary provided by the employee is accurate and does not challenge the employee’s summary.

There is no mechanism in place that would permit the employer to re-grade an employee without going through a formal process.

In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.

I thank both parties for their professionalism throughout the hearing.

Having considered the matter and in the interest of fairness there is only one recommendation I can make.

The employee has been performing all tasks allocated to him in a very satisfactory manner and therefore my recommendation is that he be paced on the Clerical Grade 3 scale with the terms and conditions appropriate to this scale. Had the employee been placed on this scale in 2012 he would have received the benefit of annual increments. My recommendation is that he be placed on the top of the Clerical Grade 3 scale with the associated terms and conditions with immediate effect i.e. with effect from 15 October 20021.

s.13 Industrial Relations Act, 1969.