Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

The Worker

The Employer

Representatives

  Representative association

An 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 - 00003977

20/03/2025

The worker submits she they worked in a temporary capacity for over 6 years and suffered loss arising from temporary allowances paid.

The worker submits that she was in a temporary role as an instructor following a competition in 2017 and this role remained temporary until her appointment in a permanent capacity in 2024.  During that temporary role for which there were four extensions she received allowances but such allowances are less than the allowance she would have received in a permanent role.  The worker submits that over 6 years is not an acceptable length of time to be in a temporary capacity and to be impacted financially by such delays.  A senior member of staff recommended in November 2022 that the worker be appointed in a permanent capacity and this did not happen until February 2024.  It was further submitted that the lens of the fixed term workers act should be utilised in analysing the unacceptable length of time remaining in a temporary role.

The employer submits that the worker was aware of the temporary nature of the position when she applied in 2017 as it was clearly set out.  As per policies and procedures such positions can only be filled in a permanent capacity where there is an open competition and this took place end of 2023 and the worker was appointed in 2024.  The worker was not a fixed term worker and therefore the terms of that Act do not apply.  It is not unusual for a worker to receive a temporary allowance for working in a specialised post and the worker was not given a time limit of the temporary position.  Furthermore, a permanent allowance applied where the worker is engaged in a wholetime position and the worker was not in a whole time position and her grievances regarding the dispute was reviewed by three senior members of the organisation and was not upheld.

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

The worker utilised her grievance procedure and her dispute was not upheld.  I note that while there are a number of facets to this dispute including how long a temporary position should be a temporary position, and which does not appear to be explicitly set out in the employer’s policies and procedures, it is noteworthy that in November 2022 a recommendation from a senior member of the organisation advised that the worker should be appointed.  It was further recommended that this appointment should be communicated through the organisation’s communication bulletin, which would normally happen every three weeks.  It took, however, almost a year later before the position was advertised and the worker was appointed in February 2024 and no reasons appear to have been given for the significant delays. 

Due to the unique circumstances of this dispute as they apply to this specific worker, I recommend that the employer pay the worker compensation of €900 for the unexplained and what appears to have been unnecessary delays that caused considerable distress to worker.

I recommend that the employer pay the worker compensation of €900 for the unexplained and what appears to have been unnecessary delays that caused considerable distress to the worker.

Temporary allowance, permanent allowance