Case Number: ADJ-00000070. Workplace Relations Commission

• Docket Number: ADJ-00000070
• Date: 08 March 2016
• Court: Workplace Relations Commission
• Parties: Claimant V Local Authority

ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00000070

Complaint(s)/Dispute(s) for Resolution:

Act	Complaint/Dispute Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1946	CA-00000114-001	07/10/2015

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 09/12/2015

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Shay Henry

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015, following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.

Complainant’s Submission and Presentation:

The complainant has been an employee of the respondent local authority since 1998. In January 2006 he was offered and accepted an Acting Grade V position in the Stores Department following the retirement of the Grade VI in that area. This continued until November 2014 when it was terminated without agreement and in May 2015 the Stores Department closed. Notwithstanding the fact that the acting allowance terminated in Nov 2014, the complainant continued to exercise the same duties until May 2015 when he was redeployed to the Finance Department as a Grade III. There was no discussion with the complainant or IMPACT on the impact this would have for him and his grading and it is contended that 9 years acting goes beyond what is a reasonable timeframe and that he should be offered a Grade V position within the local authority.

Respondent’s Submission and Presentation:

The respondent contends that this is a cost-increasing claim and is precluded under the provisions of the Public Service Agreements. Appendix 6 of the Haddington Road Agreement dealt with the regularisation of long-term actors and committed to bringing the issue to a conclusion as part of the workforce planning process. Discussions took place with the unions at a national level and following an LRC process in relation to acting arrangements in South Dublin County Council, it was agreed between the parties that confined competitions would be held for posts sanctioned under Workforce Planning which were being filled by long-term actors. The Respondent is compliant in all respects with this national agreement. The complainant was afforded the opportunity to apply for the Grade V positions which were sanctioned under the Workforce Planning exercise on a confined basis in line with the agreements at national level. There is no practice for positions to be awarded without competition in the Local Authority sector, which is a position protected by management and unions alike.

At all times the complainant’s employment as Grade V was referred to as acting up. The Labour Court has noted in LCR 19753/10, (North Tipperary and IMPACT), that ‘there is no agreed or established limitation on the length of time during which a post can be filled in an acting capacity.’

In addition, the Court has found that cases such as this cannot succeed outside agreed procedures. LCR 20634, (Louth County Council and Paul Kelly) refers. In that case the Court found that ‘the re-grading of staff in Local Authorities is regulated by legal, public policy and collective agreement constraints’. The Court noted that discussions were provided for under the auspices of the Haddington Road Agreement to regularise the status of staff in long-term acting positions and recommended that the claimant in that case be considered in the context of whatever agreement emerged.

Conclusions:

...