ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Adjudication Reference:  ADJ-00035255

Parties:

Complaint:

Date of Adjudication Hearing:  12/01/2023

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969,following the referral of the complaint/dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint/dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint/dispute.

Background:

The Worker seeks regrading to the grade in respect of which duties it is contended she has been carrying out for some years without the appropriate remuneration.

Summary of Worker’s Case:

The Worker commenced employment in 1993 where she was originally employed as a 'Community Childcare Worker', which has since been re-categorised as Social Care Worker grade. She was subsequently re-graded into the role of 'House Parent', which has also been re-categorised to Social Care Leader (SCL) in 2000. 

ln 2O14, the Worker was requested by the then Principal Social Worker to take on additional duties, including supervision of staff.  lt was outlined to her that in taking on the additional duties, this would see a re-grading to the role of Social Care Manager. She agreed to take on the additional duties based on the proposal from her line manager.

As the Worker was carrying out Social Care Manager duties, she sought a re-grading of her post locally with management, into the role of which she was performing the duties of. She submitted a business case to support her re-grading application but this was turned down. She subsequently went back to college to become accredited in family support. She completed a business case with her line manager seeking a re-grading which was again refused. As a result, the Worker formally invoked the grievance procedure, which was not successful. From there the case was referred into the Workplace Relations Commission seeking adjudication.

The case

The Worker is employed on a Social Care Leader contract even though she is completing the duties of a Social Care Manager. lt is not disputed by the Employer that she is preforming the duties of the Social Care Manager. She is not only on an incorrect pay scale, but she has also suffered a loss of earnings by remaining on the incorrect pay scale, in addition to being on the wrong annual leave arrangement.

The Worker’s role is more aligned to the Social Care Manager post then it is the Social Care Leader grade. She completes and approves staffs annual leave, provides supervision to SCL's and Social Care Workers as well as carrying out PMDS of staff members. These are all distinctively Management duties and are classified as such in the SCM job description.

There is no job evaluation scheme in operation in the Employment and as such there is no other mechanism open to the Worker to have her duties and her work evaluated. There are national discussions underway around introducing a job evaluation scheme. This will only be open to clerical grades and as a Health and Social Care grade the Worker will not be eligible The WRC is the only other forum for her to have her claim heard and remedied.

There are previous WRC recommendations, including ADJ-22853 which recommends re-gradings in the context of their specific circumstances and the fact that no other mechanism existed to have their post re-graded internally. We are seeking the re-grading of the Worker based on her specific circumstances and regarding the fact that there is no circular or scheme which would adequately address her issue within the structure of the employment.

Summary of Employer’s Case:

The Worker is a Social Care Leader with line management responsibility for 3 staff, all of whom are Social Care Workers.  In 2021 the grievance procedure was invoked by the Worker to progress her claim to be re-graded to Social Care Manager.  She progressed her grievance to be regraded through Stages 1,2 and 3 of the Employer’s grievance procedures.  The claim was rejected at Stage 3 on the grounds that there is no mechanism for regrading posts in the employment and the claim is a cost increasing claim which is prohibited under National Agreements.  In 2020 the Employer introduced Job Evaluation for Clerical / Admin grades and this was subsequently withdrawn as sanction had not been secured from the relevant Department. Job Evaluations are cost increasing and prohibited under the Public Service Agreements.  The Labour Court upheld this position in LCR22465.

The Employer is not in a position to progress this claim due to the fact that no mechanism exists for Job Evaluation or Re-Grading and the Employer would be required to secure sanction from the relevant Department to implement Job Evaluation.  This has been denied by the Department for Clerical / Admin grades for reasons including the fact that the request has broader implications across the wider sector.  It is argued that there is a knock-on affect if this claim is conceded.

A re-structuring programme in the employment is currently underway and any re-grading or changes in reporting structures are matters for negotiations with the trade unions and stakeholders.                         Labour Court Recommendation LCR22663 sets out “having regard to the extant National level review…and potential broader implications of conceding the worker’s claim .. the Court does not recommend concession of the within claim.”

The Employer requests the Adjudicator to find in favour of its position.

Findings and Conclusions:

The Worker has progressed her claim for re-grading through the procedures in the employment.  The outcome was that the Employer decided that notwithstanding her responsibilities, it was unable to accede to her request for re-grading on the basis that there is no mechanism for re-grading posts in the employment and cost increasing claims are prohibited.    It is noteworthy that the outcome of Stage 2 of the process referred to the Employer not disputing “the factual information included in the business case provided” and “you are performing duties beyond your defined contractual remit”.        I note that even if the proposals for a Job Evaluation scheme are approved in the future, this scheme relates to Clerical / Admin grades and the Worker cannot avail of this scheme if and when it is introduced.    I note there are re-structuring discussions underway but there is no indication of when they might be completed.   This is highly unsatisfactory for the Worker in this case.  However, as has been found by the Labour Court in recent cases, there is no mechanism for regrading posts in the employment and the claim is a cost increasing claim which is prohibited under Building Momentum.

I therefore cannot recommend concession of the Worker’s claim.

Recommendation:

For the reasons outlined, I do not recommend the concession of the employee’s claim.

Dated:   12-07-23

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Key Words: