Under job-sharing, established in 1984 by an Irish Government Circular, two civil servants may decide to equally share one full-time job so that the benefits are shared equally by both persons concerned and the costs of the post to the administration remain the same. The two civil servants retain the right to return to fulltime employment at the end of the period for which they had opted to jobshare, provided that suitable vacancies exist. Each year's job-sharing service counts as six months' full-time service, so an officer who has served for two years in a job-sharing capacity is placed on the second point of the full-time scale (equivalent to one year's full-time service).
A dispute arose between Ms. Hill and Ms. Stapleton, who had previously worked in a job-sharing capacity, and the Revenue Commissioners and Department of Finance of Ireland concerning the latter's decision to place them, on their return to full-time employment, on a point of the full-time pay scale lower than that of the job-sharing pay scale that they had previously occupied. Ms. Hill and Ms. Stapleton challenged their classification before an Equality Officer, who found in their favor on the ground that their employer was precluded from applying a provision to the effect that only paid service should be taken into account for progression on the incremental scale. The Labor Court, faced with appeal from the Revenue Commissioners and Department of Finance, referred these questions to the Court of Justice of the European Communities.
1. What would have been the result in this case if more men had availed themselves of the job-sharing option?
2. If, in the future, more men take care of the children and the percentage of women job-sharers drops, could the employer change its rules back to what they were before this case in order to reduce expenses?
3. What effect will this ruling have on Irish taxpayers? Would this decision prevent the government agencies from eliminating the job-sharing program to save expenses?