LCR23038

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00048287 (CA-00059473 IR-SC-00001895)

BACKGROUND:

The Worker appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on 3 May 2024.

in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.

 On 27 March 2024 the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation.

 “I recommend the Employer ensure that in future campaigns examples of what constitutes “or equivalent” are set out in the vacancy notice…..

I recommend the Worker engage with HR in early course and put forward his own suggested

accommodations to assist him in the interview process in preparation for when next he is eligible to

apply for the position he seeks.’’             

A Labour Court hearing took place on 30 August 2024.

DECISION:

The Court has given very careful consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties.

The matter before the Court concerns a recruitment competition conducted in 2021. The worker was not permitted to advance in the competition because it was deemed that he was not qualified to do so.

The Court was hindered in its consideration of the matter because a large part of the foundation for the trade dispute was said to be a recruitment advertisement issued by the employer at the time. In the course of the hearing, it emerged that, in fact, the advertisement submitted to the Court was targeted at external candidates whereas a separate recruitment advertisement was targeted at staff of the employer. The worker was and is an employee of the employer. The Court was not provided with a copy of the advertisement which had been targeted at internal candidates.

The worker contends that, whereas he did not possess the academic qualification required at the time of the competition, other candidates, including the successful candidate, were similarly without that qualification. He contended that the competition was unfair as a result and seeks an upgrading.

The employer disputes that any candidate admitted to the competition was not qualified to do so. It was submitted that all candidates either possessed the academic qualification or an equivalent.

The employer also submits that the worker was not qualified as an internal candidate to apply for the post being advertised because he was not in a role graded as GA2 at the time, which was a pre-requisite condition for the admittance of internal candidates to the competition.

The Court notes that the internal grievance procedure was utilised by the worker, and that the final stage of that procedure concluded in November 2022. The referral to the Workplace Relations Commission took place in October 2023.

It is clear to the Court that the worker is committed to his work and his career in the employment and indeed demonstrates that through his progressing his efforts to secure a professional qualification in a leading institution for such education internationally. It is clear also that the employer values the commitment of the worker.

The Court does not believe it would be realistic, at this remove in time, to decide that the resolution of this trade dispute can involve, as the worker claims, an upgrading. The Court is unable, based on all of the material put before it, to conclude in 2024 that the conduct of the 2021 competition was unfair.

In all of the circumstances, the Court decides that the employer should review the text of recruitment advertising to ensure clarity of message especially to workers in the employment. Furthermore, where jobs are advertised internally into the future the employer should invite any worker who requires clarity as to his or her possible candidature to liaise with the HR function in that regard.

The Court also recommends that a meeting should be held with the worker to agree, in a coaching / mentoring context, any assistances which might be required and available to him in the process of job interviewing or any other measures he might be advised to follow in the progression of his career.

The Court so decides.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Kevin Foley
TH	______________________
10 September 2024	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Therese Hickey, Court Secretary.