Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Seanie  Farmer

Cork County Council

Representatives

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994

CA-00073240-001

08/07/2025

 The Complainant was employed as a General Operative with the Respondent from 19 April 2000.  He alleged that he was not notified in writing of changes to his terms of employment. 

The Respondent denied the allegations.

In his complaint form, the Complainant alleged that he was not notified of a change to his terms of employment.

The Complainant stated that he accepted an assignment from water services to roads following the transfer of water services from local authorities to UISCE Eireann. He stated that he accepted the assignment to roads based on receipt of written confirmation as follows: “should you accept the assignment from water services to roads, you will retain your acting driver a rate of pay”. The Complainant outlined that this e-mail was sent to him on 1 October 2024 and that he accepted the position on 6 October 2024. The Complainant stated that his acceptance was acknowledged by letter and e-mail from the Respondent stating that he would be starting with roads and engineering based in Killeagh on 6 February 2025.

The Complainant advised that he adhered to his contract when he reported for work on 27 March 2025 to the road section in Killeagh after an illness.  He outlined that his wages had dropped considerably as the Respondent ceased paying him his Driver A rate as per his contract.  He further outlined that the Respondent had changed the wording twice in a letter of 24 June 2025 and an e-mail dated 3 July 2025.

The Complainant outlined that his employer also made unlawful deductions of €1876 from his salary on 3 April 2025.  He stated that this was done without his knowledge or written consent and that he was left to survive on €385.78 for two weeks. He stated that the Respondent had not given him any explanation in relation to this matter.

The Complainant stated that he did not think an employer could change the wording of a contract after he accepted it and they had acknowledged it. He stated that as he would be retiring in a little over 2 years the loss of the Driver A rate would have made a difference to his pension. He stated that he was informed that his phone and eating on site allowance would be backdated and this would occur without him signing a new contract. He stated that the documentation sent to him indicated that he would need to sign at a new contract and that was the only option available to him.

The Complainant provided copies of correspondence referred to in his complaint form and copies of pay slips in support of his complaint.

Witness evidence – the Complainant:

The Complainant confirmed at hearing that he did not receive notice in writing of a change to his terms of employment.

The Complainant gave evidence that following the decision to transfer water services from the local authorities to UISCE Eireann (Irish Water) he applied for a transfer to roads as he did not want to be reassigned to Irish Water as he had only a short time left to retirement.  He confirmed that he had been in employment with Cork County Council for 24 years and that for the last 10 years of his employment he had access to a van as part of his role.  He stated that as part of his call out duties he received an eating on site allowance and a driver allowance and he stated that he had sought clarity in relation to those payments before accepting the transfer.  The Complainant drew attention to correspondence received from Mr. B McAleer which confirmed that he would retain his Driver A allowance, that he would not have general access to a van and that he would be part of the on-call roster if he accepted the position at Killeagh.   He advised that he accepted the position on that basis and that on 12 November 2024 he received email correspondence, followed by a hard copy letter, confirming the transfer and advising that this would take place in February 2025.

The Complainant advised that he got paid the allowance in January 2025 but that he was on sick leave at the time of the transfer in February.  He advised that he was not paid the Driver A allowance in February and that he ultimately took up the position on 27 March 2025.  He confirmed that he received a contract on 24 June 2025, long after he had taken up the position.  He further confirmed that the Respondent had advised that the basis for not continuing the allowance was a circular issued by the LGMA on 16 January 2025, after he had accepted the transfer on the terms and conditions outlined to him on 1 October 2024.

The Complainant confirmed that he would send a copy of his January 2025 pay slip to the WRC to demonstrate the value of the allowance.

In response to questions from the Adjudication Officer, the Complainant confirmed that he completed a time sheet outlining when and where he was driving and that he had consistently completed this time sheet and undertaken the duty for 6-8 years.  He confirmed that he received an allowance of €28.45 p.w  for this duty and that he was not paid the allowance while on sick leave.  He advised that when he applied for voluntary reassignment there was no mention of the acting arrangement on the form.

The Respondent Submission

The Respondent submitted that the Complainant commenced employment with Cork County Council as a temporary labour roadworks person on 17 April 2000. He was subsequently appointed as a permanent General Operative with effect from 5 March 2001. The Respondent submitted that that the letters of appointment relating to those positions contains the following information:

·       The full name of the employer and the employee

·       The address of the employer

·       The main place of work

·       The job title

·       The date of commencement

·       The expected duration of the contract

·       The rate of remuneration

·       The length of intervals between the times at which remuneration is paid

·       Details of the sick leave scheme

·       Details of the pension scheme and retirement age

·       The period of notice which the employee is required to give and entitled to receive

·       Reference to collective agreements

The Respondents submitted that in 2011 Cork County Council undertook a review of organisational structures. The outcome was to reorganise delivery of outdoor services by function, instead of the heretofore area-based management structure. This created separate management structures for (i) water services, (ii) roads and municipal services and (iii) housing maintenance. The Complainant remained doing waterworks services following this change in organisational structure.

The Respondent submitted that Irish water was incorporated in July 2013 as a company under the Water Services Act 2013; with responsibility for bringing water and wastewater services of the 31 local authorities together under one national service provider. On the commencement of Irish water in 2013, each local authority signed a service level agreement (SLA) with Irish water, to allow local authorities continue providing water services until the end of 2025, funded by Irish water. This 2013 SLA was replaced by the Master Cooperation Agreement (MCA) signed in 2023 to allow for the orderly transfer of water services management, control, direction and staffing, to Irish water by the end of 2026.

The Respondent further submitted that a national agreement was reached between unions, LGMA and DPER regarding options for local authority staff in water services, and these options were included in the MCA. As with all water services staff, the Complainant’s employment was covered by the MCA made by the local authority with Irish water. The options included in the MCA were as follows:

·       Transfer to Uisce Eireann

·       Stay with local authority in a different assignment

·       Voluntary Redundancy

The Respondent noted that it had issued a letter dated 9 May 2023 to all staff in water services providing information in relation to the MCA, confirming that it had been signed and providing access to a copy of the MCA. The Respondent also noted a copy of an information letter from the Chief Executive of Cork County Council to all water services staff dated 23 June 2023 which provided similar information. The Respondent noted further a copy of an information letter from Cork County Council to all water services staff dated 4 August 2023 outlining the commitment to water services staff, in accordance with the commitment made by minister Darragh O’Brien. In addition, the Respondent noted a copy of an information letter issued by the Chief Executive of Cork County Council to all water services staff dated 5 September 2023 advising of the effective date of the change.

Reassignment

The Respondent submitted that it held information sessions for water services staff and wrote to all water staff on 18 October 2023 with information regarding the internal reassignment process and including expression of interest form for reassignment.  A further letter was issued to water services staff dated 22 February 2024 advising on the up-to-date situation in regard to the transition.  The Respondent submitted that the Complainant submitted an expression of interest for reassignment.

On 12 November 2024 the Complainant was advised by letter of his reassignment, in his role as General Operative, to MD Roads & Engineering, East Cork, based initially at the Killeagh Yard, taking up duty on 6 February 2025.  The Respondent submitted that the Complainant was one of the first water services staff members to be reassigned.

The Respondents submitted that on 16 January 2025, the LGMA published to all local authorities, the consolidated framework document, bringing together the various advices on how such reassignments were to take place. The Complainant commenced a period of sick leave on 2 January 2025 and returned to work on 27 March 2025, taking up duty in his role as General Operative, in his new assignment. On 24 June 2025 the Respondent sent the Complainant a detailed document confirming his transferable overtime and allowances, in accordance with the minister’s letter. The Complainant raised queries in regards to acting up which he had in his previous water services role. The Respondent submitted that by its nature, acting up occurs in the public service for short to medium term needs in a specific role. In this case, acting up in water services did not transfer to reassigned roles. The Respondents submitted that reassignment involves moving to a new role, as sought voluntarily by the Complainant, and he was reassigned to a General Operative role, as notified to him on 12 November 2024; prior to commencing in the reassigned role on 27 March 2025.

Based on the foregoing the Respondent submitted that there was no breach of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994.

Sick Leave

The Respondent submitted that the sick leave issue raised in the Complainants complaint was not a change to the Complainants terms and conditions and was outside of the scope of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994. The Respondent further submitted that’s all stuff in the count in the council were covered by the public service sick leave scheme. It noted that an error was made in the Complainant’s payroll, which was rectified by the making of an urgent payment outside of the payroll system, which then had to be accounted for in the payroll system in the next payroll.. The Respondents admitted that the deduction from wages payroll of illness benefits payable to a staff member while on sick leave, is a normal part of the operation of the sick leave scheme the responded noted that it appeared in this case, that illness benefit deductions did not occur in March 2025 and a cumulative illness benefit deduction was made in April 2025. However, this cumulative illness benefit deduction represented an equal value to the illness benefit received by the Complainant.

As a result of the foregoing, the Respondent submitted that no breach of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994 occurred.

Representations on behalf of the Respondent at hearing

Mr. O’Keeffe gave his apologies for the late submission and clarified that this was due to the incongruence between the complaint submitted and the Terms of Employment (Information) Act.  He stated that the Respondent had gone to considerable lengths to ensure that staff impacted by the transfer of services to Irish Water were fully informed of their options arising therefrom.  He set out the details of the transfer arrangements for the service and the options available to relevant staff.

Mr. O’Keeffe confirmed that it was not in dispute that Mr. McAleer had advised the Complainant that he would retain the Driver A allowance.  However, he stated that an acting arrangement is a temporary arrangement and that payment only accrues when a person is undertaking the relevant duty.  He stated that the Acting payment remains available to the Complainant should he be required to undertake the relevant duty and so it was the Respondent position that there was no change in the Complainants terms and conditions.  He confirmed that in the new assignment the Complainant was not required to undertake driving duties as there were sufficient staff in his reassigned location to cover this roster at present.

I have given careful consideration to the written submissions/documentation provided by the parties, and to the oral testimony and representations given at hearing by the parties.

It was the Complainant position that he was not notified in writing of changes to his terms of employment and he clarified his complaint to be that he accepted a reassignment to a new position based on information provided to him by the Respondent on 1 October 2024.  It was his position that these terms and conditions of employment were then altered by the Respondent when he took up the position in March 2025 and that he was not notified in writing of those changes.  It became evident at hearing that issues relating to sick leave had been disposed of between the parties and was not for consideration/decision.

It was the Respondent position that the allowance that was the subject of the Complainant’s complaint was paid for an acting arrangement and that it remained available to him should there be a requirement for him to act up into the driver role.  The Respondent contended that there was no requirement for the Complainant to carry out the role of a driver upon taking up the reassigned role.

Section 3 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act states:

“3 - (1) An employer shall, not later than 2 months after the commencement of an employee's employment with the employer, give or cause to be given to the employee a statement in writing containing the following particulars of the terms of the employee's employment, that is to say –

(a) the full names of the employer and the employee,

(b) the address of the employer in the State or, where appropriate, the address of the principal place of the relevant business of the employer in the State or the registered office (within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1963),

(c) the place of work or, where there is no fixed or main place of work, a statement specifying that the employee is required or permitted to work at various places,

(d) the title of the job or nature of the work for which the employee is employed,

(e) the date of commencement of the employee's contract of employment,

(f) in the case of a temporary contract of employment, the expected duration thereof or, if the contract of employment is for a fixed term, the date on which the contract expires,

(g) the rate or method of calculation of the employee's remuneration,

(h) the length of the intervals between the times at which remuneration is paid, whether a week, a month or any other interval,

(i) any terms or conditions relating to hours of work (including overtime),

(j) any terms or conditions relating to paid leave (other than paid sick leave),

(k) any terms or conditions relating to —

(i) incapacity for work due to sickness or injury and paid sick leave, and

(ii) pensions and pension schemes,

(l) the period of notice which the employee is required to give and entitled to receive (whether by or under statute or under the terms of the employee's contract of employment) to determine the employee's contract of employment or, where this cannot be indicated when the information is given, the method for determining such periods of notice,

(m) a reference to any collective agreements which directly affect the terms and conditions of the employee's employment including, where the employer is not a party to such agreements, particulars of the bodies or institutions by whom they were made”.

Section 5 of the act states that“ (1) Subject to subsection (2), whenever a change is made or occurs in any of the particulars of the statement furnished by an employer under section 3 , 4 or 6 , the employer shall notify the employee in writing of the nature and date of the change as soon as may be thereafter, but not later than -

(a) 1 month after the change takes effect, or

(b) where the change is consequent on the employee being required to work outside the State for a period of more than 1 month, the time of the employee's departure”.

The facts of this case were not in dispute between the parties and I understand them as follows:

·       Arising from the establishment of Irish Water and the transfer of water services from local authorities to Irish Water, a national agreement was reached that provided options for staff of local authorities working in water services

·       The Agreement provided 3 options for staff as follows:

o   To transfer to Irish Water

o   To remain with the local authority and be reassigned to another position

o   To take voluntary redundancy

·       The Complainant opted for internal reassignment to another position within the Respondent employ

·       In advance of making application for reassignment, the Complainant sought clarity in relation to certain of his terms and conditions of employment, namely the use of a van, the continuation of his Driver A allowance, the continuation of his eating on site allowance and the call out system

·       On 1 October 2024, Mr. McAleer, on behalf of the Respondent responded to those queries by email

·       In that email the Respondent confirmed the following:

o   That the Complainant would only have use of the van for work purposes

o   That if the Complainant took up the available position in Killeagh he “would be rostered on the emergency call out for the Youghal area.”

o   That “should you accept the assignment from water services to roads, you will retain your acting Driver A rate of pay”

o   That payment of eating on site allowance may be payable in accordance with council policies for outdoor staff.

·       On 6 October 2024 the Complainant responded to Mr. McAleer thanking him for his response to the queries and confirming that he would accept the transfer.  Thereafter the Complainant submitted his formal application for reassignment, which was stamped received by the Respondent on 13 November 2024.

·       On 12 November 2024 Mr. C Cotter of the Respondent HR Department confirmed by email that the Complainant would transfer as a General Operative to the Killeagh position.  That email made no mention of specific terms and conditions of appointment but did outline the relevant reporting relationship and the requirement to retake part of the Safety Induction Programme.  It also required the Complainant to complete and return a staff exit checklist and to return any property associated with his original position.  The email gave no indication that the terms set out in Mr. McAleer’s email of 1 October had changed in any way.

·       The Complainant ultimately did not take up the transfer position until 27 March 2025 due to a period of illness and from that date forward he did not receive payment of the Driver A allowance, nor was he added to the call roster.

·       Following a number of queries to the Respondent in relation to these issues he was informed on 24 June 2025 that a circular had issued from LGMA in January 2025 and that it was clear that individuals could not transfer on their acting grade.  Appended to that letter was a form setting out his new terms and conditions of appointment to the reassigned role.

The specific issues that the Complainant raised concerns about were the payment of his Driver A allowance and the failure to provide him with on-call.  He had been in receipt of the allowance for circa 8 years prior to the transfer and had been undertaking call duties.  As his complaint related to that allowance, and his assignment to driving duties and call out, I am satisfied that these matters fall within the meaning of Section 3(1) (d) and Section 3(1)(g) and (i) of the act. 

Upon consideration of the above sequence of events it is evident that the Complainant’s substantive role was that of General Operative and, in addition, he was in receipt of a Driver A allowance for undertaking driving duties and participated in on call. It is also evident that prior to accepting a reassignment the Complainant sought clarity in relation to the continuation of this arrangement and that clarification was provided by the Respondent when Mr. McAleer confirmed by email of 1 October 2024 that if the Complainant took up the available position in Killeagh he “would be rostered on the emergency call out for the Youghal area” and would “retain your acting Driver A rate of pay.”  I find that this correspondence was clear and unambiguous and it is clear to me that, on the basis of that information the Complainant made formal application for the reassignment and this was confirmed on 12 November, one day prior  to him making the formal application for reassignment.  In the correspondence confirming his transfer there was no reference made to the fact that he would not receive the Driver A allowance and would not be rostered for call out. While the letter did refer to his transfer being at the grade of General Operative, this reference alone would be insufficient for a staff member to be clear that the allowance and the on call were no longer part of his role.

I noted that the LGMA document was issued to local authorities in mid-January 2025, months after the Complainant had been given confirmation that he would continue to be part of the call roster and would retain his Driver A allowance and it seems to me that the documented terms as set out by Mr. McAleer and accepted by the Complainant established the terms of his employment in advance of that circular.  In those circumstances, I accept that the Respondent had an obligation, in accordance with Section 5 of the Act, to notify the Complainant in writing of changes to those terms of employment no later than one month after the change took effect. 

I do not accept the Respondent position that there were enough staff rostered on the call rota.  The Complainant was given written confirmation that he would join that rota and it was the responsibility of the Respondent to roster him accordingly.  Had the Complainant been rostered for call it is evident that he would have been required to drive, and his allowance would have continued.

I am satisfied, based on the uncontested evidence of the Complainant, that the payment of the allowance and his participation in the call roster ceased when he took up the reassigned role on 27 March 2025.  In that context, he was entitled to receive written notice of the changes, no later than 27 April 2025.  I noted that the Complainant first received written confirmation of the changes when the Respondent responded to his queries on 24 June 2025, and provided a copy of the LGMA circular of January 2025 and a full list of the terms and conditions attaching to his reassigned role. 

Based on all of the above I accept that the Complainant did not receive written notice of changes to his terms of employment within one month of those changes and I find that his complaint is well founded.

I found this complaint to be well founded, and I decide accordingly.  

Redress

The Act provides that an Adjudication Officer may

“7(2)(c) require the employer togive or cause to be given to the employee concerned a written statement containing such particulars as may be specified…

(d) order the employer to pay to the employee compensation of such amount (if any) as is just and equitable having regard to all the circumstances but not exceeding 4 weeks remuneration in respect of the employee’s remuneration….”

The Complainant was in receipt of €39,536.30 per annum.  Taking into account the impact of the changes to the terms of employment on the Complainant and the resulting loss of income, I consider the maximum permissible award of 4 weeks’ pay to be just and equitable in all the circumstances.  In that context, I direct the Respondent to pay the Complainant the gross amount of €3041.