ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00004131
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | An Assistant Engineer | A County Council |
Representatives | Fórsa Trade Union | Head of Human Resources |
Dispute:
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 - 00004131 | 15/04/2025 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Christina Ryan
Date of Hearing: 13/11/2025
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended)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 information relevant to the dispute.
I received and reviewed documentation from both parties prior to the hearing.
As this is a trade dispute under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969, the hearing took place in private and the parties are not named. They are referred to as “the Worker” and “the Employer”.
Background:
The Worker referred a dispute to the WRC on the 15th April 2025 wherein he sought an adjudication on the matter of his correct point of the incremental scale of “Assistant Engineer”. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The Worker, with the assistance of his trade union, sought to engage with the Employer regarding the application and interpretation of “Circular EL 01/2020: Application of additional increments awarded to New Entrants at points 4 and 8 under the Public Services Stability Agreement 2018-2020”. It was submitted on behalf of the Worker that the Worker’s incremental point was wrongly calculated by the Employer thereby financially disenfranchising the Worker. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Employer acknowledged that the Worker and his trade union representative had raised the issue with the Employer. The Employer submitted that the Worker was awarded the correct increment and that the dispute was unfounded. |
Conclusions:
In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.
The Worker referred his dispute to the WRC on the 15th April 2025. In response to questions from the Adjudication Officer it was confirmed that whilst there was engagement between the parties in an attempt to resolve the dispute the Employer’s internal grievance procedures were not exhausted by the Worker prior to referring his dispute to the WRC.
It is well established that before referring a grievance about any matter to the WRC an employee must exhaust the internal procedures at their workplace. In Gregory Geoghegan trading as TAPS v. A Worker INT1014 the Labour Court held:
“The Court is not prepared to insert itself into the procedural process in a situation where the dispute procedures have been bypassed.”
I conclude that as the internal procedures have not been exhausted I cannot insert myself into the procedural process. In the circumstances, I conclude that the Worker’s dispute is not well founded. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
For the reasons set out above I do not recommend in favour of the Worker.
Dated: 8th of December 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Christina Ryan
Key Words:
|