This website contains decisions and determinations of both the Labour Court and the WRC. It also contains decisions and recommendations of the Equality Tribunal since 1996 and post 2007 determinations of the Employment Appeals Tribunal. For more information click here

  Return to Search

LCR22720

FULL RECOMMENDATION


CD/22/242
ADJ-00038771, CA-00049731-002
DECISION  NO.  LCR22720

SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969


PARTIES:
HEALTH SERVICE EXECUTIVE WEST

- AND -

A WORKER
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)


DIVISION:

Chairman: Mr Haugh
Employer Member: Mr O'Brien
Worker Member: Ms Treacy

SUBJECT:

1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No(S) ADJ-00038771, CA-00049731-002

BACKGROUND:

2. The Worker appealed the Adjudication Officer's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.

The Adjudication Officer had issued the following Recommendation:

"I recommend that the employer takes no further action with regard to this grievance."

A Labour Court hearing took place on 22 February 2023.







DECISION:

Background to the Dispute

This is an appeal by the Worker from a Recommendation of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00038771/CA-00049731-002, dated 18 November 2022) under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. Notice of Appeal was received in the Court on 13 December 2022. The Court heard the appeal in a virtual courtroom on 22 February 2023.

The Worker has been employed by the HSE/ the Western Health Board (‘the Respondent’) as a General Operative since 1977. The dispute concerns a request by the Worker for payment for sixty-six hours of accrued overtime. The Respondent submits that the established custom and practice is to allow workers to take time-off-in-lieu (‘TOIL’) in respect of such accrued overtime hours.

The Worker relies on a letter dated 19 April 2010 from the Respondent to SIPTU that states:

  • “I wish to confirm that any employee who was in service prior to January 2007, retains the old Western Health Board Terms & Conditions including the Time Off in Lieu provision of appropriate equivalents.”
The Worker submits that there is a typographical error in the above paragraph and the final three words should read “or appropriate equivalents”. It his submission that read in that manner, it is clear that the letter supports his claim for payment of accrued overtime, payment being an appropriate equivalent to TOIL.

Discussion and Decision

The resolution of the within dispute turns on the interpretation of the letter of 19 April 2010 which relates to the terms and conditions of a cohort of workers employed by the Respondent. The matter is, therefore, collective in nature and, in the Court’s view, not properly before it under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. When asked about this by the Court, the Worker’s Representative concurred.

The appeal, therefore, does not succeed. The Recommendation of the Adjudication Officer is varied accordingly.

The Court so decides.

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
NCL ______________________
28 February 2023 Deputy Chairman


NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Nuria de Cos Lara, Court Secretary.