FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : FAS - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation R-036042-ir-05/GF.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned commenced permanaent employment with FAS as a General Assistant, Grade 13, in the Print Room of FAS Head Office in June, 2003. He replaced a General Assistant who had left.
In January, 2005 the Union, on behalf of the worker, lodged a claim that a second non-existent Grade 11 be created in the Print Room and that the worker concerned be appointed unilaterally to the position.
The issue was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. His recommendation issued on the 30th November, 2005, as follows:-
“I have considered the complaint carefully and I cannot come to the conclusion that his treatment is unfair. I note his efforts to improve his position and I agree with the organisation when it encourages staff members to show willingness to demonstrate their potential ability. I find in the company’s favour.”
The Union on behalf of the worker concerned appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on the 4th January, 2006, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 12th April, 2006.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The duties carried out by the worker concerned and the Grade 11 employee in the Print Room are the same. Only the Grade 11 employee gets the recognised rate for the job.
2. In January, 2005 the Print Room supervisor gave the worker concerned the Job Description for a Grade 11 Machine Operator. These are the duties he provides.
3. The worker concerned has been trained on the two Printing Machines and instructed to work same for the last two years.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.The worker concerned could not and has never been instructed by FAS to carry out duties above his grade.
2. Promotional vacancies in the Public Service must be within approved staffing establishments and then filled as per procedure through competition.
3. The worker received training on the Printing Machines as part of a development opportunity.
DECISION:
The Court does not accept that a basis exists upon which it could recommend that the Claimant in this case should be upgraded to Grade 11.
The Court does, however, recommend that in line with the agreed position in respect of the Print Room, arrangements should be put in place so as to ensure that if the Claimant is instructed by his Supervisor to undertake work above his grade, the time spent on such work is recorded and that the Claimant is remunerated accordingly.
With this qualification the Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner is affirmed.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
19th April, 2006______________________
MG.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.