INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
CITY OF CORK VEC
- AND -
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Murphy
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation R-031595-Ir-04-DI.
2. The worker concerned has been employed by Cork City VEC since September 1981 as a Building Construction and Woodwork Teacher. The worker applied for a B Post on several occasions but was unsuccessful in securing a promotion.
In February 1999 the worker again applied and was once again unsuccessful in securing a promotional post. He appealed the decision to the selection board. An Arbitrator was appointed and found in favour of the worker.
In November 2000 revised selection procedures for the appointment and promotion of teachers in Vocational Schools were issued in CL 43/00. A new competition took place in May 2001. The worker was again unsuccessful, appealed the decision and an Arbitrator found in his favour.
The worker decided to seek a review by an independent third party and the case was subsequently referred to the Rights Commissioner Service of the Labour Relations Commission. The Rights Commissioner found in the worker's favour.
The VEC appealed the Recommendation to the Labour Court on the 15th June, 2005, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 9th December, 2005. The Court's Decision is as follows:-
At the commencement of the hearing the representative of the Employer raised an objection to the jurisdiction of the Court to investigate this dispute on the basis that the Claimant is not a worker within the meaning of the Industrial Relations Acts 1946 to 2004. It was pointed out that the Claimant is an Officer of the VEC and is thus in a category which is excluded from the statutory definition of the term "worker" by the express provision of Section 23(1)(e) of the Industrial Relations Act 1990. This matter was not raised before the Rights Commissioner.
The Court adjourned the case so as to allow the Claimant address this point of which he had no prior notice.
Having considered the communication subsequently received from the Claimant the Court has come to the view that it has no option but to accept that it has no jurisdiction to deal with this dispute. The Court determines accordingly.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
16th January, 2006______________________
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.