ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00009605
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Manager | A humanitarian aid agency |
Representatives | Hugh Hegarty SIPTU | Mary Jayne McFerran, Penninsula Group Limited |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00012600-001 | 18/07/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 13/10/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969, following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the dispute.
Background:
The claimant started working with the respondent organisation in May 2009. She reports to the Director General and she herself has three direct reports. This dispute concerns two changes that were implemented in recent years. The first, implemented in 2012, is concerned with the manner in which motor travel and subsistence expenses are claimed. The second, related to grading, occurred in May 2016. The claimant is aggrieved with the manner in which these changes affect her and she has applied to the WRC for a recommendation on the issues. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
Mileage and Subsistence As part of her role as National Quality and Training Manager, the claimant is required to travel abroad twice a year resulting in an absence from Ireland of around eight days. She is also required to travel about once a month to meet team members in Tipperary and Limerick and she uses her private car for these trips. She said that the distance travelled each month is around 400km. At the time she joined the organisation, expenses were claimed in line Civil Service rates which were issued in circulars by the Department of Finance and then the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. In July 2012, SIPTU agreed to a change proposed by the Board of Directors that expenses would be claimed on a “vouched receipts” basis. It was also agreed that, rather than use Civil Service motor travel rates, driving would be claimed on the basis of 35 cents per km. As a result of these changes, employees travelling abroad are reimbursed for expenses actually incurred, whereas the Civil Service rates may result in reimbursement in excess of the cost incurred. In respect of motor travel, the rate of 35 cents per km is lower than the Civil Service motoring rates that apply when driving less than 5,500 km per year. (Depending on engine size and the number of kilometres driven in any year, the Civil Service rate drops in bands to the lowest rate of 21.36 cents per km.) The complainant was unhappy with these changes and discussed her grievance with the director general at the time. He agreed that she would not have to accept the new procedures and the old regime continued to apply to her on a “red circled” basis. A new director general was in place by December 2016 and, following discussions with the complainant, he wrote to her about the fact that she was the only person in the organisation who was not in compliance with the expenses procedures. He concluded his letter as follows: “From the 1st February 2017 the system which applies to all staff and volunteers will apply to you regarding expenses and mileage. “You may discuss this with me if you wish.” On January 16th, the claimant replied to say that she objected to the change and she sought the advice of her SIPTU representative to attempt to reach a resolution. Pending the intervention of the union, the director general said that he would put the change “on hold.” A meeting took place on February 1st but no agreement was reached. On July 18th this year, the matter was referred to the WRC. Review of Jobs and Grading When she joined the organisation, the claimant had the role of National Training and Support Manager. This involved the development, administration and support of training courses for staff and volunteers. In 2010 she was given additional responsibilities and her job title was changed to Deputy Head of National Services. By February 2016, with the organisation under a new director general, the claimant was asked to cease using the title, “Deputy Head of National Services” and she commenced using the title, “National Quality and Training Support Manager.” A review of grades and roles in 2016 resulted in a restructuring of the organisation’s employees into six job families, from a basic administration entry grade to a senior management grade as follows: Senior Manager Project Manager Team Leader Administration Staff Administration, Support and Development Grade 1 Administration, Support and Development Grade 1 The claimant is one of five managers reporting to the director general, three of whom are senior managers and one of whom is the IT Manager. Her concern is that her role is not considered to be part of any “job family.” She wants her job evaluated by an independent consultant to determine if her role belongs in the senior manager grade. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
Mileage and Subsistence It is the view of the director general and the board of directors that the changes to the expenses claims policy introduced in 2012 should apply to the claimant. It was pointed out that the organisation is a registered charity and the manner in which funds are used must be consistent and transparent. While it is accepted that in 2012, the claimant reached an agreement with the former director general that the new rates would not apply to her, the organisation now wishes to remove this anomaly. Review of Jobs and Grading The director general acknowledged that the claimant’s role is outside the job family structure. His view is that her role is not that of a project manager and the claimant concurs with this position. While he accepts that her job is complex, he does not agree that it is equivalent to that of a senior manager, as the senior managers have larger budgets and around 14 direct reports. Having completed the review of jobs and grades in 2016, the director general said some further consideration is required to evaluate how the claimant’s role could incorporate some of the work of the Commercial Department. Depending on the outcome, this evaluation could result in a re-grading of her role to that of senior manager. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Mileage and Subsistence While the claimant reached an agreement with the former director general that she would be entitled to claim expenses and subsistence on a “red circled” basis under the Civil Service Motor Travel and Subsistence schemes, it is my view that it is not appropriate that this should continue on an indefinite basis. Review of Jobs and Grading At the hearing, I expressed my concern to the claimant and her representative about the risks associated with an independent evaluation of a single role in the organisation and the potential that this may not produce a satisfactory outcome for either party. However, an opportunity arises from the forthcoming review by the director general of the claimant’s responsibilities and the possibility that the outcome may result in her role being evaluated at the level of a senior manager. |
Decision:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
Having considered the views of both parties to this dispute, I make the following recommendation: The director general should evaluate how the claimant’s role could be expanded to include some of the responsibilities of the Commercial Department and this review should be completed by May 31st 2018. With effect from June 1st 2018, the claimant should claim motor travel and subsistence expenses in line with the policy that has applied to all staff and volunteers since 2012. |
Dated: 20th November 2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Key Words:
Job evaluation, grading, expenses |