Latest in Employment Law>Case Law>Fingal County Council v A Worker [2018]
Fingal County Council v A Worker [2018]
Published on: 07/01/2019
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Legal Island
Legal Island
{}
Background

This case involved an appeal against the Adjudication Officer’s recommendation. The claimant worked in the Internal Audit Section for the Council as a Senior Staff Officer Grade 6. He claimed that he was entitled to be paid at the Grade 7 pay scale for the period from the 18th of August 2011 until the 15th of February 2016, as he argued that during that period he had carried out the functions of the retired Administrative Officer (who was paid at a Grade 7 level). 

In August 2018, the Adjudication Officer found that the complaint was not well founded. The decision was appealed to the Labour Court. The Worker contended that he was expected to and did take over the duties and responsibilities from the retired Administrative Officer. Management within the Council disputed this claim, stating that the claimant was never requested to carry out the workload or take on the responsibilities arising from the vacancy.

It was stated that the Council was prohibited from filling the role due to the government embargo on recruitment and promotion, which resulted in over 400 vacancies in the Council not being filled at the time. Approval for filling such vacancies could only arise where statutory or regulatory requirements necessitated the filling of a post.

Having considered oral and written submissions, the court held that the imposition of the moratorium on recruitment and promotion had the effect of preventing the Council from replacing the retired Administrative Officer, as it was not a post which required to be filled by regulation or statute. The Court also held that it was clear the claimant had carried out extra duties following the retirement of the Grade 7 post holder, however, it was equally clear that he was not accountable for such work. That responsibility rested with the Senior Executive Officer Grade 8.

The Court was satisfied that authorisation had not been given to amend the claimant’s post to a Grade 7 position and therefore the Court could not recommend that the claimant be paid at the higher grade for the period in question.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Cases/2018/December/LCR21843.html

Continue reading

We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.

Already a subscriber?

Please log in to view the full article.

What you'll get:

  • Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
  • Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
  • 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
  • Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team

Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial

Disclaimer The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article. This article is correct at 07/01/2019
Q&A
Legal Island’s LMS, licensed to you Imagine your staff having 24/7 access to a centralised training platform, tailored to your organisation’s brand and staff training needs, with unlimited users. Learn more →