Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86828 Case Number: LCR10871 Section / Act: S67 Parties: DUBLIN CO. CO. - and - ITGWU;FWUI |
Claim for an increase in pay for approximately forty watchmen.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has considered the submissions placed before it and
does not recommend concession of the Unions' claim.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86828 THE LABOUR COURT LCR10871
CC861397 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR10871
Parties: DUBLIN COUNTY COUNCIL
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
FEDERATED WORKERS' UNION OF IRELAND
Subject:
1. Claim for an increase in pay for approximately forty watchmen.
Background:
2. The dispute is an on-going one within the Council which local
level negotiations failed to resolve. At present the claimants'
rates are as follows (inclusive of the first phase of the 25th
round):
#2.24 per hour during the week.
#2.74 " " at weekends.
Bank holidays at double the weekday rate.
On the 22nd August, 1986, the matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. No agreement could be
reached at a conciliation conference, held on the 9th October, and
the matter was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the 24th November,
1986.
Unions' arguments:
3. (i) A conciliation conference concerning the pay of
nightwatchmen took place in January, 1984. Following
this, the Council - by letter dated 15th February,
1984, offered to apply the Dublin Corporation rates
(details supplied to the Court). This offer, apart
from proposing a reduction in the basic rate, presented
a major difficulty for the Unions. This relates to the
difference between the nature of the contract applying
in Dublin Corporation as against the Council. The
Corporation nightwatchmen work up to a maximum of four
nights per week and claim unemployment benefit in
respect of the remainder. Work is allocated on a first
come, first served basis in accordance with the
Corporation's day-to-day requirements. The Council
situation is entirely different. The Council watchman
must undergo an interview as is the case with all other
grades. He then becomes employed on a regular basis,
working the same depot or site and working regular
rostered hours. In fact it has been established that
Council nightwatchmen should be superannuated in the
normal way in accordance with the Local Government
Superannuation Acts.
(ii) Despite the apparently higher status of the Council
job, the Corporation man is considerably better off due
to the combined effect of pay and unemployment benefit.
A parity agreement exists between conditions in the
Council and Corporation in respect of the grades
represented by the general unions. This, however, has
never been the case in respect of watchmen because the
duties and nature of the jobs are entirely
incompatible.
(iii) The Unions are seeking the establishment of a rate of
pay commensurate with the duties and responsibilities
of similar workers in the security industry generally.
On the 1st May, 1984, a Registered Employment Agreement
(REA) was registered between the security industry and
the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union. This
provided for a set of minimum rates of pay and
conditions in respect of static guards in that
industry. The Council watchmen perform exactly the
same duties as these static guards. This agreement was
reviewed with effect from January, 1986, and now
provides for:
. A minimum rate of pay - #2.90 per hour.
. Overtime premium at T+1/4 for hours in
excess of forty.
. Unsocial hours payments of #11 per week
(standard cash premium) to all non-day
workers who work shift or other variable
work rosters and payment of an additional #5
for Sunday.
(iv) The role in security played by the claimants exceeds,
in many cases, that of the workers covered by the REA.
The Council's own interests and those of the public
would be well served by a pay structure designed to
provide recompense at least comparable with that in the
private sector. Otherwise, good workers will not
retain the interest or fully apply themselves and
ultimately will not be retained in the job.
(v) It is regrettable that the Council - a public body
discharging public funds - should be employing people
on pay and conditions which are inferior to those
provided by statute in respect of such work.
Council's arguments:
4. (a) The Council has a general agreement with the Unions for
parity of basic rates between the Council and Dublin
Corporation. The rates of pay for watchmen in Dublin
Corporation are as follows:-
Weekend Day Watching - #1.96 - #1.99 per hour
Night Watching - #2.16 - #2.21 per hour
Sundays and Bank Holidays are paid at double
time
It can be seen therefore that generally speaking the
Council's hourly rate is higher than that in the
Corporation except that the Corporation pays double
time on Sunday and the Council has already indicated to
the Unions that it would be prepared to bring its rates
of pay for watchmen into line in all respects with the
Corporation. Any increase granted to the Council's
watchmen as a result of the present claim would lead to
repercussive claims in Dublin Corporation and possibly
in all other local authorities.
(b) In the course of the negotiations the Unions claimed
that the agreement for the security industry as
registered in the Labour Court should be applied to the
Council's watchmen. The Council cannot accept
this argument because the agreement applies to
companies who are engaged fulltime in the security
industry and provide a security guard service for their
clients. The Council's watchmen are employed directly
by the Council and are generally deployed to the same
depot whereas the registered agreement applies to
people who may be changed from client to client as the
occasions demand. A large portion of security
companies work involves the provision of security in
shops, banks and other places to which the public have
full and open access. This type of work involves a
degree of crowd control and policing premises and can
involve apprehending members of the public for shop
lifting etc. On the other hand the type of work done
by the Council's watchmen is in areas which are not
open to the public, while the watchmen are on duty
e.g., depots, tipheads, parks. The work basically
involves being present on the site to discourage
trespassing and vandalism. The requirements for
employment by a security firm would be far more
stringent than the requirements for employment as a
watchmen in the Council.
(c) In addition to their normal pay watchmen are paid half
an hour at double time per day, travelling time and
also eating-on-site allowance of #1.13 per day. This
amounts to #16.85 per five day week. The average
weekly wage of watchmen is #170.00 and this is
considered to be a fair wage for the duties performed.
(d) The Council is in a serious financial position in that
its income for the current year has been reduced by #6
million and the Public Services Pay Agreement will cost
#800,000 this year and #2.8 million next year. The
Council is making every effort to maintain jobs and
services at the highest possible level and in this
context, it is essential that unreasonable claims
should not succeed.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court has considered the submissions placed before it and
does not recommend concession of the Unions' claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
________________________
Deputy Chairman.
15th December, 1986.
D.H./J.C.