LCR23036

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00043019 (CA-00053345 IR-SC-0000777)

BACKGROUND:

The worker appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on 7 May 2024 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act,1969.

On 12 April 2024 the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation:

“I cannot uphold the complaint with respect to the upgrading of the post or with respect to the manner of filling of posts recommended/ identified / approved for upgrading because these matters are outside of my jurisdiction.”

A Labour Court hearing took place on 21 August 2024.

DECISION:

This matter comes before the Court as an appeal by the worker against the decision of an Adjudication Officer.

The worker participated in a recruitment competition conducted by the employer under licence from the Commission for Public Service Appointments (CPSA). He was notified of the results of that competition on 15th July 2021. He was successful in his application to be placed on a panel for appointment and was placed fourth on that panel.

He submits that the employer failed to advise him in advance of the make-up of the interview panel for the competition. He contends that 50% of the members of the interview panel had an undeclared conflict of interest which affected him.

He submits that he should now be appointed into the position at issue or should be awarded compensation.

The employer submits that the worker made no complaint regarding the recruitment competition to the CPSA as he was entitled to, and instead made a complaint to the employer eight months after completion of the competition. The hospital agreed to have the complaint dealt with by a relevant manager. The manager found that the competition was conducted in accordance with CPSA guidelines and any recommendations which were made have been implemented by the employer.

The employer submits that, having regard to agreements and arrangements in place in the employment, no appointment of the worker to a grade 8 position can now be made without the conduct of a further open competition.

The Court has carefully considered the submission of the worker and the employer. The competition at issue took place in mid-2021 and no referral of the within trade dispute to the WRC was made until 19th October 2022. The Court also notes that no referral to the CPSA challenging the conduct of the impugned competition was made at all.

The Court can see no basis for it to pass judgement on compliance with the Code of the CPSA or the requirements of any licence of the CPSA in relation to the competition. Similarly, the Court cannot make assessments as regards the alleged undeclared conflicts of 50% of the interview board and in particular can give no weight to such allegations in the absence of any individual against whom such allegations are made.

In all of the circumstances and having particular regard to the lapse of time since the conclusion of the competition at issue, the Court can find no basis to recommend concession of the claim of the worker.

The Court so decides.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Kevin Foley
FC	______________________
2 September 2024	Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Fiona Corcoran, Court Secretary.