The Irish Supreme Court has found a part-time teacher at a preschool in Galway was not employed by the Minister for Education.
The case arose in the context of the education system in Ireland, where schools are generally under the day-to-day control of the management boards, however, teachers are paid by and subject to the employment conditions of the Minister for Education.
The teacher in this instance taught for twenty years at the Hillside Park pre-school for Travellers where she worked 3 hours a day, 5 days a week. The school was primarily funded by a grant from the Minister and closed in 2011 when this grant ceased due to the introduction of a universal pre-school scheme. For the most of her employment, 98% of her salary was paid from this grant to the management committee of the school. The Minister also paid her redundancy.
In 2009, the teacher sought access from the Minister to the National School Teachers’ Superannuation Scheme. The scheme was established under the Teachers Superannuation Act 1928, and provides pension benefits to teachers employed in national schools. She was refused on the grounds that she was not a national school teacher employed in a national school. The teacher brought proceedings on the basis of her part-time status, arguing that she was being treated less favourably than a full time comparator sharing the same employer, namely the Minister. Both the High Court and the Court of Appeal agreed that there was an implied contract of employment between the two parties in relation to pay.
The question for the Supreme Court therefore was whether the Minister could be regarded as the employer for the purposes of the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act 2001, or at least insofar as it relates to financial or pay matters.
In finding against the teacher, the Court looked at the term ‘contract of service’ under the 2001 Act which suggests the employee agrees to do work under the legitimate direction of the employer. In these circumstances, the Court stated that the Minister had no such control over the work of the teacher. The Court also placed emphasis on the fact that she was not paid directly by the Minister but by Hillside Park out of a grant provided by the Minster. It noted that employees of a different employer under the same scheme were given access to a pension scheme, and therefore the matter came down to the available resources of the school rather than any issue connected with the Minister.
Click here for the judgement in The Minister for Education v Boyle.