TDs’ growing concern over cases being brought against them to the Workplace Relations Commission

Questions asked over a ‘pattern’ of WRC entertaining actions by members of the public

There is a perceived trend in Leinster House of employment cases being brought against TDs to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC).

Senan Molony

Concerns are growing at Leinster House over a perceived trend of employment cases being brought against TDs to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC).

The Dáil quietly voted last week to authorise spending on the legal defence of “proceedings [that] arise solely out of the performance by the member concerned of their parliamentary functions as a member of Dáil Éireann”.

The case is understood to be separate to one brought to the WRC a year ago in which a member of the public complained about a TD’s efforts on their behalf, as if the TD had an employment duty to a member of the public.

In that case, the constituent initiated an action under the Equal Status Act after they had asked the TD for representation on a disability issue but was not satisfied with the result.

“There are questions being asked about a pattern whereby the Workplace Relations Commission is entertaining these cases,” said a TD with insight into the matter yesterday, while insisting on anonymity.

Meanwhile, the Houses of the Oireachtas itself refused to comment, saying such cases were themselves “anonymised”.

The latest issue is thought to relate to more standard employment on the Leinster House campus.

However, a source said: “The question is being asked whether we are going to be dealing with this all the time now.”

TD Joe Carey, a member of the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission, brought a Government motion on Thursday that the Dáil “hereby authorises the commission to defend Workplace Relations Commission proceedings against a member of Dáil Éireann”.

It is the second such money order, but Leinster House officials refused to divulge whether the previous matter had been disposed of, with some TDs having viewed it as vexatious. Mr Carey refused to discuss the matter.

Meanwhile, the Independent.ie can reveal that the Houses of the Oireachtas is also prepared to defend itself in a further matter relating to pension abatement, scheduled to be heard next month.

An usher at Leinster House has filed a statement of claim alleging that his abatement of pension is unlawful after the individual made a job transfer from elsewhere in the public service.

Abatement describes a reduction in the pension of a person who is re-employed in the public service after their pension has begun payment from a previous post. They are not allowed to receive more in their new role than the full-time salary in the post from which they retired, whatever it might be now.

In other words, the income from both sources combined cannot exceed the “upscaled” equivalent of their old job.

But the argument against this is that the restriction prevents people from improving their lot and arguably may infringe their Constitutional right to earn a living.

The case has implications across the public service, especially in the health area, where the Government has been keen to re-hire retired nurses and other staff. The same ramifications apply to retired gardaí and members of the Defence Forces.

If an alleged unfair dismissal case were to go to the Workplace Relations Commission, it is expected that the TD involved would be named in the ordinary course of proceedings.