A Teagasc employee who took the organisation to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has been awarded €15,000 in compensation and Teagasc has been directed to provide her with "a contract of indefinite duration".

A contract of indefinite duration (CID) is similar to a permanent contract but is not defined in statute, according to Employment Rights Ireland.

The complaint by the employee was referred to the WRC in July 2025.

The complainant has been employed by Teagasc as a data technologist since September 5, 2016, and is based at the research centre in Johnstown Castle, Wexford.

She is employed on a specified purpose fixed-term contract, for the purpose of carrying out specific research activities associated with the Agricultural Catchments Programme.

She complained to the WRC that she is entitled to a 'Contract of Indefinite Duration'.

WRC case

The employee began working as a technologist grade 1 carrying out the duties and responsibilities of data technologists which the WRC heard is pivotal to both the Nitrates and Water Framework Directive within the Teagasc Agricultural Catchments Programme (ACP).

The complainant claimed that Teagasc breached Section 9 of the Protection of Employees Fixed Term Work Act 2003.

In July 2023, following a promotional process, she secured the position of technologist grade 2 and was assigned the additional higher-level duties and responsibilities within ACP.

According to the WRC document, at no point during her employment has the programme been discontinued or paused.

It began in 2008 and over the period has grown and forms part of the greater government policy on climate actions.

The programme is now in its fifth phase and the WRC documents reference an article on Agriland published in November 2023 which highlighted the approval provided by the government and the objectives that ACP would be assisting farmers improving water quality.

According to the WRC decision, the additional duties and responsibilities associated with the phase 4 and 5 of the programmes are a deviation from the original specific purpose and are such a contract albeit in name.

The securing of the technologist 2 position added further duties and responsibilities communicated to the employee in 2023 and was "without question a second contract albeit in name".

The WRC added that the duties identified fall outside the original Specific Purpose of the catchment programme contract of 2013 and further demonstrate that the work in question is ongoing and continuous.

Teagasc contract

Teagasc has previously argued that the restrictions placed on them by the government department and workforce plan precludes them from issuing a Contract of Indefinite Duration.

The employer cited the payroll ceiling as a determining factor in not issuing CID.

The parent department - Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM) - states that the employer has delegated sanction mechanism to address these, albeit the organisation has specific grades and core numbers which they cannot exceed without DAFM and DENPR (Department of Public Expenditure) approval.

The WRC stated: "It is our assertion that the employer does not have the liberty to avoid their legislate responsibilities and a moratorium on recruitment, or a payroll ceiling within the organisation, does not negate an individual's legal right or entitlement.

"Adherence to DAFM rules is not a legislative objective as defined within case law.

"We believe that the grounds stated by the employer in the complainant contracts of employment are not objective grounds, and therefore we consider that they were vague and general do not meet the requirement of Clause 8 of the Act.

"We further believe that the employer breached Section 9 of the Act."

The WRC adjudication officer directed that the Teagasc employee be given a 'Contract of Indefinite Duration'.

He also said that it was "just and equitable" to award her compensation in the amount of €15,000.