Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

Disability Home Support Manager

National Health Service Body

Representatives

Tony Martin Forsa Trade Union

 Employee Relations Department

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 - 00000746

10/10/2022

This claim relates to the workers application a retrospective upgrade from grade 6 to grade 7 effective from 2012.

The worker transferred into disability services of the Employer in 2009. She previously worked in the home help support function of the Employer.

The terms of her transfer at the time were that she was charged with developing a new service in the area which was that of a Community Respite Service for people with Intellectual Disabilities and Autism and all the associated structures around that service such as finance and staffing.

In October 2012 following the success of this service for two counties over she had responsibility, she was asked to replicate the same serviced for two additional counties which resulted in more than doubling of her workload.

In January 2014 the home health services ceased providing personal care services to deals with the disability of under age 65. The worker was asked to develop a personal care service to bridge the gap in the service provided for that age cohort.  This resulted in additional duties for the worker.

In October 2018 the Employer advertised for a grade 7 Home Support Manager for a county adjacent to those for which the Worker had responsibility. The job description for this role was identical to the work carried out by the worker for four counties at the same time.

The successful candidate for that role came into the post in February 2019 at grade 7. This role was replicated in 2021 for some of the counties that the Worker was doing the role in.

An application for the Worker's role to be upgraded retrospectively is not being acknowledged by the Employer.

The Workers workload dramatically increased over her tenure in the role. Her expertise and experience were used as a template to develop job descriptions to appoint people at a higher grade. She expanded the roles across numerous counties without recognition.

She explained that she had engaged with a job evaluation scheme. For many years she was promised better terms but nothing materialised.

She wishes to retire in 2024 and requires to be put on the correct grade for three years before her retirement.

She submitted that the 2018 agreement did not apply to her. She hasn't been in the role of Home Help coordinator since 2009.

The Employer rejected the complaint. They submitted that she had been offered a contract in line with the agreement reached between FORSA in the WRC in 2018. 

That agreement outlines the implementation time for when those in existing roles would be upgraded from grade 6 to grade 7. The date for the upgrade to happen was 9 October 2019. The worker has been offered contract which will be backdated to 9 October 2019. She will be placed on the relevant point of grade 7 salary scale in line with the agreement reached in 2018.

The Dual Responsibility Allowance ceased nationally in 2012.

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

I have been presented with the total conflict between the parties’ position in relation to the grading of the Worker.

I accept the Workers case that she went through several job evaluation processes. It was accepted that she was working at a higher grade for many years.

Job evaluation process