ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00000716
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Chief Ambulance Officer | A Health Care Organisation. |
Representatives | Catherine Keogh of FORSA | Company HR Manager |
Dispute:
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | IR - SC - 00000716 | 29/09/2022 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Date of Hearing: 21/04/2023
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:
The dispute concerns multiple Industrial relations and grading issues between the Worker and the Employer dating back over twenty years. The rate of pay is a national pay scale. The employment commenced on the 1st November 1999 and continues. |
Linked Recommendation.
This Recommendation is linked to parallel Recommendation IR-SC-00000716 in all respects.
1: Summary of Workers Case:
Ms Keogh of FORSA set out in detail the background to this case in a lengthy Oral Testimony supported by a very comprehensive Written submission. The dispute and the background issues have been central to a number of major Consultants Reports from MAZARS, disputed Regrading Exercises and a Dignity at Work Complaint against a superior officer. Extensive discussions involving high level Union Officers and most senior Employer Officials have also been a feature of the Dispute for a number of Years. The most recent Consultants Report, the Hughes Report entitled “Key HR Themes that underpin the Complaints” was undertaken by Ms Janet Hughes in January 2022. The Report is comprehensive and makes a variety of important Recommendations. Ms Hughes would be regarded as a most senior Industrial Relations consultant. Ms Keogh intimated that the “Hughes Report” was very helpful and did appear to be forming the basis of a major wide ranging organisational review by the Employer. However, the personal situation of the Worker in this dispute remains unresolved and required to be addressed quickly. FORSA were open to immediate fruitful discussions with the Employer to resolve this |
2: Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Employer representative, a very Senior HR Manager, was unaccompanied at the Hearing. Other National Directors were unavailable, for a variety of operational reasons, on the day. It was clear from her comments that the Hughes Report was now a crucial feature of the entire situation. A much more comprehensive Employer representative Team would be required to progress the case at Adjudication. However, it was also clear that the issues arising for the two Mangers at the centre of this Dispute needed to be “tidied up” in the context of the ongoing organisational review. Some further engagement between the Parties could possibly be fruitful. |
3: Conclusions:
In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.
The Adjudication Officer listed carefully to a very wide ranging and comprehensive discussion between the Parties regarding the dispute. The history was very complex and involved multiple senior level Representatives from the Trade Unions and the Employers at various stages over the years.
On questioning from the Adjudicator as to how the issues regarding the two Workers might be brought to a conclusion both sides were hopeful that a further senior level engagement might be fruitful.
FORSA were somewhat cautious as there had been similar initiatives in the past (including disputed undertakings at WRC Conciliation Conferences) and the Workers would need some reassurances that any new discussions would indeed be realistically productive. A Time Frame would be required.
The Employer HR Manager likewise pointed out that she did not have a mandate, at the time of the Hearing, to negotiate a resolution. It would require further Employer high level internal discussions.
On this basis the Parties were agreed that a Recommendation, to form the basis of further discussions, from the WRC Adjudication Officer under the Industrial Relations Act ,1969 would be most helpful.
Accordingly, on this basis, a Recommendation would issue.
It was intimated that, if discussions did not progress satisfactorily, an Appeal of the Recommendation could / would be made to secure a full Labour Court hearing into the dispute. |
3: Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
It is recommended as follows
- The Worker and Employer Representatives acknowledge that the Hughes Report of January 2022 represents a major milestone in the progress to a resolution of this very long running and complex dispute.
- The Parties to the Adjudication hearing on the 21st April 2023 immediately or as soon as is convenient, commence a process of discussions to focus on finding an acceptable solution for the situation of the two workers concerned in this dispute.
- It is Recommended that full negotiating flexibility be the basis of the discussions.
- It is Recommended that the Negotiators make full use of well recognised Industrial Relations vehicles such as “Red Circling”, “Personal to Holder” etc if fear of repercussive claims from other parties proves an unhelpful issue.
- It is Recommended that a closing date for the Negotiation and hopeful settlement is the 30th June 2023.
- It is Recommended that in the event of an unsatisfactory outcome this Recommendation is to form the basis of an Appeal to the Labour Court. It is recognised that to abide by Labour Court Appeal Rules it may be necessary to lodge a “pro forma” Appeal of this Recommendations within the deadlines. This Appeal can be withdrawn if negotiations are successful.
Dated: 27th April 2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Key Words:
Reorganisation, Regrading, Janet Hughes Report. |
|