ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00002624
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Psychologist | A Health provider |
Representatives | Peter Jones Peter D Jones & Co Solicitors | W Toomes, Internal HR |
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 | IR - SC - 00002624 | 14/05/2024 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Date of Hearing: 01/10/2024
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:
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. No. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The worker was employed as a staff grade psychologist. It subsequently transpired that he was undertaking the duties of a senior psychologist. Sometime in 2021, he sought to have his post redesignated but was informed that his employer was not in a position to redesignate his post. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The employer confirmed that the worker is undertaking the role and duties of a senior psychologist. The employer confirmed that it is aware of only one such case within its workforce. The employer confirmed that there is no mechanism for redesignating a staff grade post as a senior psychologist. |
Conclusions:
In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties. The parties are in agreement that the worker is undertaking the duties of the role of Senior Psychologist. The parties acknowledge that there is no mechanism for assigning an uplift to someone who is in the role of staff grade psychologist. The worker is undertaking higher duties and occupying a higher role and three colleagues who were in management/clinical roles above him provided confirmation at the hearing that he was undertaking the role of senior psychologist. Having regard to the foregoing, I conclude that as the worker is undertaking the duties of the Senior Psychologist role, he should be paid accordingly. This payment and recognition of occupying the role of Senior Psychologist should be backdate to 1 July 202, roughly when the worker raised the issue with his employer. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I recommend that the worker be redesignated as a Senior Psychologist with effect form 1 July 2021. This should include payment to, and recognition of, the worker undertaking the role since that time.
Dated: 04th October 2024.
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
IR dispute – undertaking duties commensurate with a Senior role - recommendation |