LCR23211

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Referral of a trade dispute under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.

BACKGROUND:

The Worker referred this case to the Labour Court on 22 September 2025 in accordance with Section 20 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, and agreed to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation.

A Labour Court hearing took place on 8 January 2026.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Dispute

The Worker holds a PhD in polymer chemistry and has been employed by Trinity College Dublin (‘the Employer’) in various research roles since 2003. He acquired a contract of indefinite duration in 2007. He was awarded the honorary title of Research Associate Professor in 2018 in recognition of his achievements in securing research funding for the University.

The Worker’s annual salary is currently €98,086.00. The Worker’s salary at all times throughout his employment with the Employer has been on a rate personal to him. It is common case that he negotiated salary increases over the years having regard to his success in attracting external funding and on the basis of his research and publishing profile. The Worker claims, however, that he should be remunerated according to an appropriate established pay scale and be in receipt of regular incremental pay increases.

The Worker’s Submission

The Worker submits that it had been expressly communicated to him in 2018, in the course of the process that culminated in his appointment as Research Associate Professor, that he would thereafter be remunerated in accordance with the Associate Professor pay scale. He relies, in particular, in making this submission on an entry made on the Nomination for Appointment Form that identifies the ‘Date of 1st increment’ as ‘01 October 2019’ and the ‘Increment amount’ as ‘As per pay scales’.

The Worker has asked the Court to recommend that the Employer engage in a review of his remuneration through a university procedure known as Procedure 46X. He is also seeking ‘compensation that is just and equitable’ for his ‘ongoing financial loss’.

When asked by the Court, the Worker said that he had applied for only one substantive academic position with the University during his twenty-three years of service. He also confirmed to the Court that he had regularly negotiated increases to his salary as a researcher during that period, culminating in his current annual salary of €98,086.00.

The Employer’s Submission

It is submitted on the Employer’s behalf that the Worker does not hold a substantive academic position in the University and, therefore, does not fall to be remunerated in accordance with any established academic pay scale. All academic vacancies in the University, the Court was told, are filled by international competition. The Employer emphasised that the title of Research Associate Professor is honorary in nature only and not linked to any grade or pay scale. The reference to increments on the form nominating him as Research Associate Professor was an error.

It is further submitted that the Irish University Association have published recommended pay scales for academic researchers but that the Worker’s current salary exceeds all points on those recommended pay scales.

The Employer told the Court that Procedure 46X is not applicable in the Worker’s case as the Worker has never been employed in an academic role and the procedure sets out the process for confirmation of academic staff in post.

Finally, the Employer submits that the Worker has not identified any financial loss and therefore the question of compensation for same does not arise.

Discussion and Recommendation

The Court finds that the Worker’s claims are not well-founded and does not recommend concession of them. It is clear to the Court that the Worker has been very successful in his successive research roles in the University over the past twenty-three years. The Employer acknowledged this by bestowing on him the title of Associate Research Professor. It is beyond doubt that this nothing more than an honorary title and is not linked to any substantive grade or pay scale.

It is also abundantly clear to the Court that the Worker has been very successful in negotiating his salary upwards on many occasions over the years on the back of his personal achievements in securing external research funding.

The appropriate avenue open to the Worker, should he now wish to move beyond a situation where he negotiates any further increases to his salary to a situation in which he would be entitled to annual increments, is to successfully apply for a substantive academic post linked to such an incremental pay scale.

The Court so recommends.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Alan Haugh
JNF	______________________
13 January 2026	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be in writing and addressed to Julie Nicholl-Flood, Court Secretary.