ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: ADJ-00040082
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | Worker | Employer |
Representatives | Martina Weir SIPTU | Respondent |
Dispute(s):
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 |
| 13/12/2021 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Janet Hughes
Date of Hearing: 03/08/2022
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended)following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any information relevant to the dispute.
Background:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended)following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any information relevant to the dispute. This case has most of the same characteristics as a related case under the Payment of Wages Act 1991 which will issue at the same time. The parties are well familiar with the background to the overall situation which is detailed in the PW Decision. There is no necessity to rehearse the history and background for a second time in this recommendation.
|
Summary of Workers Case:
The failure of the employer to honour their commitments to the worker means that she has suffered substantial losses over a two-year period. She is the only person in the employment affected in this way-no other worker has experienced a pay cut. All received the full benefits of the same contractual terms as were agreed with the worker in this case. The union is seeking a recommendation that the worker be placed on her correct incremental pay point with effect from October 2021 and be paid accordingly. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
For the reasons set out in the other complaint, the employer is unable to pay the agreed terms because they have not received the necessary funding from the DEASP. Until that situation changes, they cannot restore the incremental credit. Other employees were either at the top of their scale in 2020/21 or one returned from a career break and was entitled to resume on her previous terms. |
Conclusions:
The key difference between this claim and the terms of the complaint under the Payment of Wages Act is that whereas a previous payment ceased in February 2021 resulting in a reduction/deduction which is ongoing, in this case the contractually agreed amount was not paid in the first place. In terms of recommending a means of resolving the dispute in relation to the restoration of full incremental credit, it would be of no real value to tell the employer to make a payment they have no ability to pay, when their budget and all wages are dependent on funding from a Government Department which is not providing the necessary funding. It is however recommended that the employer continues in their efforts to seek the funding necessary to honour in full the terms of their agreed arrangement with the worker as soon as possible and in doing so that she be treated in the same fashion as those who benefited from the funding for at least those pay scales arrangement put in place by FAS in 2008, to which a verbal contractual commitment was made in her case. I note with understanding, the view of the union that the current position which effectively means that the employee concerned has taken a pay cut and now faces a frozen, lower, rate of pay may well drive her out of the employment in spite of her strong commitment to her work she performs.
|
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I recommend that the employer continue to make representations to the DEASP to achieve a budgetary situation which would allow them to honour in full the verbally agreed contractual pay scale promised to the worker and which applied to others employed since 2008 while they were directly funded by FAS and for some years under the DEASP unless and until another agreement on her salary and conditions is agreed with the employer.
Dated: 12/09/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Janet Hughes
Key Words:
Non payment of incremental credit -inability to pay |