LCR23216

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00052082 (CA-00063682-001)

BACKGROUND:

The Employer appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on 16 April 2025 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.

On 7 March 2025 the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation:

“I recommend that the company pay the worker compensation of €7,500, in full settlement of the dispute. For clarity, this payment is compensation and is not related to earnings.”

A Labour Court hearing took place on 16 January 2026.

DECISION:

This is an appeal on behalf of Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals Unlimited Company (‘the Company’) from a Recommendation of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00052082, CA-00063682, dated 7 March 2025) under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. Notice of Appeal was received in the Court on 16 April 2025. The Court heard the appeal in Dublin on 16 January 2026.

Factual Background

The Complainant was, at all material times, a temporary agency worker employed by CPL Solutions Limited (‘CPL’), a licenced employment agency. She was placed by CPL with the Company as a Quality Control Chemist at the Company’s Newbridge site. The Complainant commenced this engagement on 2 April 2024. The engagement ceased on 20 May 2024 when CPL informed the Complainant that she had not successfully completed the probationary period proved for in her contract of employment with it.

Preliminary Issue

It is submitted on behalf of the Company that the Complainant has impleaded the incorrect respondent in circumstances where she was, at all material times, a temporary agency worker, employed by CPL, and she was not a ‘worker’ vis-à-vis the Company within the meaning of the Industrial Relations Acts.

Meaning of ‘Worker’ for the purposes of the Industrial Relations Acts

Section 23(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1990 provides:

“23.—(1) In the Industrial Relations Acts, 1946 to 1976, and this Part, “worker” means a member of the Garda Síochána referred to in subsection (1A) andany person aged 15 years or more who has entered into or works under (or, where the employment has ceased, worked under) a contract with an employer, whether the contract be for manual labour, clerical work or otherwise, whether it be expressed or implied, oral or in writing, and whether it be a contract of service or of apprenticeship or a contract personally to execute any work or labour including, in particular, a psychiatric nurse employed by a health board and any person designated for the time being under subsection (3) but does not include—

(a) a person who is employed by or under the State,

(b) a teacher in a secondary school,

(c) a teacher in a national school,

(ca) a teacher employed by an education and training board”.”

Discussion and Decision

It is clear to the Court that the Complainant was a worker vis-à-vis CPL (See AD1144 Grafton Recruitment v A Worker 7 June 2011). However, the Complainant had no contractual relationship with the Company and, therefore, the Court finds, was not a worker vis-à-vis the Company.

The Court accordingly upholds the Company’s appeal on the foregoing preliminary point.

The Court so decides.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Alan Haugh
FC	______________________
19 January 2026	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ms Fiona Corcoran, Court Secretary.