Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86652 Case Number: LCR10779 Section / Act: S67 Parties: ATHLONE U.D.C. - and - ITGWU |
Interpretation of a 1973 National Agreement for part-time firemen, as it relates to the rostering of part-time firemen employed by Athlone Urban District Council.
Recommendation:
5. The Court is of the view that the rostering changes proposed
by the U.D.C. are fully in keeping with the terms of the agreement
of 1973 and that the passage of time has not diminished the
workers responsibilities to accept such changes.
The Court therefore recommends that the proposed rostering changes
be implemented without further delay.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86652 THE LABOUR COURT LCR10779
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR10779
Parties: ATHLONE URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Interpretation of a 1973 National Agreement for part-time
firemen, as it relates to the rostering of part-time firemen
employed by Athlone Urban District Council.
Background:
2. In 1973 a National Agreement for part-time firemen was drawn
up between the Local Government Staff Negotiations Board and the
Congress Group of Unions representing part-time fire service
personnel nationally. As well as establishing national rates of
pay and conditions the agreement introduced the concept of an
"inclusive allowance" and had the effect of doubling the annual
retaining fee (which was introduced in 1952) in return for
availability arrangements. The part-time firemen agreeing to the
following conditions:-
"That normally half of each brigade is rostered for
continuous on-call on alternate weeks. Half of each
brigade is intended to mean alternate members of each
brigade. This may be altered:-
(a) At the discretion of the Station Officer in the
interests of the efficiency of the Service and in the
event of unavoidable illness or absence of a member.
(b) In the event of occasional unavoidable absence of one
rostered member, for part of his week, by agreement by
him another member to act for him provided such
private agreement has been notified to, and agreed by
the Station Officer or his Deputy in advance.
Should a County Manager not require to have an
availability arrangement at the present time, he will
nevertheless pay the allowances as shown. In the
event of his requiring at a later date to introduce an
availability arrangement he will have that option and
it will be on the terms set out above."
Between 1973 and 1985 rostering along the lines envisaged by the
Agreement has been introduced in 9 local authorities. On 8th
November, 1985 the Council informed the Union of it's decision to
introduce rostering with effect from 3rd December, 1985. The
commencement of rostering was deferred until 3rd February, 1986,
pending the outcome of negotiations. No agreement could be
reached and the matter was referred to the conciliation service on
3rd December, 1985. Conciliation conferences took place on 21st
January and 30th July, 1986. As agreement could not be reached
both sides agreed to refer the issue to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Labour Court hearing was held
in Athlone on 23rd September, 1986. Rostering was introduced on a
6 on 6 off basis from 3rd February, 1986, under protest. The
Council has indicated that it would be agreeable to the adoption
of an 8 on 4 off system.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) The use of the word "normally" in clause 1 of the 1973
agreement caters for the possibility of other
arrangement than rostering. The main problem for
Local Authorities at that time was to ensure an
adequate turnout
hence the introduction of rostering to guarantee a
minimum call out but it did not preclude the
possibility of all men turning out. The present
U.D.C. instructions precludes half of the men from
turning out at a loss of the hourly rate for call-out.
The present instruction is outside the ambit of the
1973 agreement.
(ii) It was agreed at a joint Union/U.D.C. meeting held in
December, 1973 to have all men rostered for duty.
This has been the practice in the Athlone Brigade up
to now. This arrangement is totally in line with the
L.G.S.N.B. agreement and it is far too late for the
Council to reinterpret the agreement to suit their
financial requirements.
(iii) The Council predicted a 10% reduction in earnings for
firemen because of the introduction of rostering.
This being the case compensation for loss of earnings
should be paid while the present system is in force.
(iv) Because of the type of roster introduced by the
Council the men have less callouts than other brigades
(e.g. Mullingar) and therefore less earnings than
other firemen working for the same Authority.
(v) The Council are trying to have it both ways with the
requirement that men be available for call out when
rostered off duty. As it stands they must notify the
station each time they leave the boundaries. If the
men are rostered off duty, they should be free to lead
their private lives as they wish.
Council's arguments:
4. (a) At a meeting between the Council and the Union in
December, 1973 a local agreement was drawn up which
included a provision whereby members of the Athlone
fire brigade accepted benefits and conditions applying
to the 1973 National Agreement. The Chief Fire
Officer at that time indicated that when rostering
was introduced every effort would be made to minimise
hardship to the members of the brigade.
(b) The Council decided because of it's deteriorating
financial position to introduce rostering, as it was
uneconomical to have an excessive turn-out for
relatively minor fires and other incidents.
(c) The 1973 local agreement in no way precludes the
introduction of rostering as it illustrates that the
members of the Athlone brigade accepted the conditions
specified in the 1973 National Agreement.
(d) The rostering system introduced relates to minor
incidents only. In the event of major incidents it is
necessary to have full turnout of both rostered and
non-rostered crews. A situation whereby a
non-rostered crew did not respond to an emergency
could not be tolerated by the Council or for that
matter any local authority. The doubling of the
annual retaining fee for availability arrangements is
an acknowledgement for the need of a full turn out in
emergencies.
(e) No claim for loss of earnings has been paid by any
authority where rostering has been introduced.
(f) The Council offered to introduce an 8 on 4 off system
of rostering and to increase the number of fire drills
to minimise the loss to the firemen. These proposals
were turned down because they are in dispute with
management.
(g) Management and the Chief Fire Officer in particular is
fully satisfied that five firemen on an appliance is a
totally safe and acceptable minimum manning level, and
does not envisage any problems arising from such a
system.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court is of the view that the rostering changes proposed
by the U.D.C. are fully in keeping with the terms of the agreement
of 1973 and that the passage of time has not diminished the
workers responsibilities to accept such changes.
The Court therefore recommends that the proposed rostering changes