LCR23130

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00039089 (CA-00051018 IR-SC-00000344)

BACKGROUND:

On 2 May 2024 the Adjudication Officer issued their Recommendation.

The Employer appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on 31 May 2024 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 29 April 2025.

DECISION:

This is an appeal by An Garda Siochana of an Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation in relation to a complaint made by a worker - a member of An Garda Siochana – in relation to the classification of her illness.

The worker contends that her employer (i) failed to address the matter in dispute in accordance with its own code, (ii) failed to correctly classify her illness as an “injury on duty” in line with the relevant code, and (ii) that as a result of those failures she has incurred a loss of earnings.

The Court’s role when hearing appeals under section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act is to hear the parties and– based on its expertise in the management of employment relationships – make a recommendation as to how the matter in dispute might be resolved. In industrial relations case, there are no matters of law arising. It is up to the parties to decide to accept a recommendation made by the Court or not.

The Court operates on the assumption that the parties before it are trying to reach an agreement about the issue in dispute. That is an important assumption. 

At the hearing, both parties confirmed to the Court that High Court proceedings are in progress in relation to the same set of facts before the Labour Court.

That being the case, the Court is of the view that the matters on appeal in this dispute are not capable of voluntary resolution as an industrial relations dispute while such proceedings remain in progress.

The Court so decides.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Katie Connolly
AR	______________________
7th March 2025	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Aidan Ralph, Court Secretary.