Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

Community Nurse

Health Service

Representatives

Ms. Anne Burke, Irish Nurses and Midwives Organisation

Mr. Damian Mullarkey, HSE Employee Relations

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-00047147

12/11/2021

The Worker commenced employment on 1st January 2007. At all relevant times, her role was described as that of “Community RGN”. On 12th November 2021, the Worker referred the present dispute within the definition of the Act to the Commission.

In the absence of any objection from the Employer, the matter consequently proceeded to hearing. Said hearing was convened for, and finalised on, 17th June 2022. This hearing was conducted by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and SI 359/20206, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. No technical issues were experienced by either side during the hearing.

During the hearing, the representative for the Employer raised a preliminary objection as to my jurisdiction to hear the dispute as referred.

In circumstances whereby the Worker is seeking the retrospective application of an allowance in respect of a specialist qualification, the Employer submitted that such a dispute has collective ramifications and should not be considered on an individual basis.

The Worker, through her representative, strongly disputed that the present dispute has any collective ramifications. In particular, she submitted that the subject matter of the dispute had been resolved in respect of numerous other individuals. At no point during these disputes was the matter considered a collective dispute as submitted by the Employer.  

The present dispute involves an application for the retrospective, and ongoing, application of the Employer’s specialist qualification allowance (SQA). In this regard, the Worker states that she is entitled to this SQA on foot of her qualifications and expertise. In March 2019, she accepted a new post within the organisation. In November 2019, the Worker migrated to the Senior Enhanced Nurse Practice contract. Shortly thereafter, the Worker became aware of her entitlement to the SQA allowance and requested, through her representative, that the same be applied to her contract. This request was declined, and the Worker subsequently referred the present dispute.

In answering the dispute, the Employer has submitted that employees that migrate to the Senior Enhanced Nurse Practice contract do not have an entitlement to the SQA. They stated that they could not comment on the position of other employees but submitted that a recommendation in the Worker’s favour would have a considerable consequent effect for other employees in a similar situation.

Section 13 (2) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 provides that,

“Subject to the provisions of this section, where a trade dispute (other than a dispute connected with rates of pay, of hours or times of work, or annual holidays of a body of workers) exists or is apprehended and involves workers within the meaning of Part Vi of the Principal Act, a party to the dispute may refer it to a rights commissioner”.

Having regard to the foregoing, it is apparent that the subject matter of this dispute may have a consequent effect for a body of workers. As such it would be inappropriate for the same to be the subject of an individual recommendation.

As the dispute potentially impacts a body of Workers, I make no recommendation in relation to the same.

Allowance, Consequent Effect