Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86622 Case Number: LCR11042 Section / Act: S67 Parties: LGSNB - and - LGPSU;ITGWU |
Claim, on behalf of 35 mobile library van drivers/assistants employed by local authorities excluding Cork and Dublin for an increase in pay.
Recommendation:
7. The Court, has considered the submissions from both parties
and the additional information invited and submitted subsequent to
the hearing. The Court also has taken into account Labour Court
Recommendation No. 10,669 and its impact on the claimants. In
addition the Court has taken into consideration the
Rationalisation Agreement draw up between the parties at national
level in 1981 (in particular clause 5.1 of that agreement) and
circular letter E.L.1/83.
The Court finds:
No evidence of any material change in the claimants'
duties since the application of the Rationalisation
Agreement referred to above.
The Court has also examined the range of duties carried out by the
claimants and Mobile Library Driver employed in Dublin Corporation
and finds that it would not be justified in recommending parity of
basic wage rate.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the claims.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86622 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11042
CC86630 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11042
Parties: LOCAL GOVERNMENT STAFF NEGOTIATIONS BOARD
and
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICES UNION
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
FEDERATED WORKERS UNION OF IRELAND
Subject:
1. Claim, on behalf of 35 mobile library van drivers/assistants
employed by local authorities excluding Cork and Dublin for an
increase in pay.
Background:
2. Prior to 1981 a wide range of basic rates of pay and
allowances existed for local authority non-craft general workers.
In March, 1981, following negotiations, a seven grade structure
for local authority general operatives was introduced in all local
authorities except Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Waterford
Corporations and Dublin County Council. A number of groups were
not definitively placed within the structure and this included
mobile library van drivers/assistants. However, following further
negotiations, an offer was made in March, 1982, placing them
within the structure and this offer was accepted by the Unions in
May and August of that year. The current rates of pay of library
van drivers/assistants, exclusive of allowances, are as follows:
Cork ............................ #161.49 per week
Dublin area ..................... #161.11 per week
other areas ..................... #149.86 per week.
3. In June, 1984 the Unions served a claim on the Board for a
review of the pay and conditions of mobile library drivers/
assistants (approximately 35) outside Dublin. No agreement being
reached at local talks the matter was referred to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court and a conciliation conference took
place in October, 1984, but no progress could be made.
4. In July, 1985 the claim was reactivated by the Unions and in
September, 1985 a meeting took place between representatives of
the Board and the Unions. The Unions claimed that the basic pay
of library van drivers/assistants is calculated on the basis of
driver grade VII rate plus a differential and sought an increase
in the differential. Management rejected the claim and stated
that the grade is an integral part of the rationalised grading
structure and cannot move independently of a general review. The
matter was again referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court on 8th April, 1986 and a conciliation conference took
place on 16th July, 1986, the earliest date suitable to the
parties. No agreement being reached, the matter was referred to a
full hearing of the Labour Court. The hearing took place on 19th
September, 1986. Following the hearing, the Court invited
additional information from both parties concerning job
descriptions. This was submitted and exchanged.
Unions' arguments:
5. (i) Areas outside Cork and Dublin were rationalised in
July, 1982. The offer which emerged resulted in the
application of a #3.00 per week differential over the
driver plant operator group B (category VII of the
rationalised rates). This differential is inadequate
and the Unions consider that it should also be index
linked.
(ii) The current rates of pay are seriously inadequate.
The workers are paid only 73% (approximately) of
average industrial earnings (details of rates of pay
for some drivers in the private sector were supplied to
the Court).
(iii) The workers discharge a wide range of functions
including classification of books, stocktaking,
withdrawing and borrowing of books. Services are
provided to the public and to schools. The levels of
responsibility involved are not adequately reflected in
the rate of pay (details of job descriptions were
supplied to the Court).
(iv) The duties and responsibilities of the grade are
substantially the same as those applicable in Cork and
Dublin. Dublin drivers, however, are paid in excess of
#11.00 per week more than the claimant grades. The
Unions seek equal pay for work of equal value.
Board's arguments:
6. (a) Drivers/assistants are an integral part of the
rationalised grading structure and cannot move
independently of a general review.
(b) The rationalisation agreement precludes claims based on
previous differentials.
(c) No evidence has been offered by the Unions of any
material changes in the duties of the post to warrant a
re-examination of placing in rationalised structure.
(d) Any concession to the claimants, in the absence of an
overall review, would lead to serious repercussive
claims, particularly from the lower paid.
(e) A special increase of #4.22 was recommended by the
Labour Court in Recommendation 10,669. A further
increase to the claimants would be entirely
inappropriate.
(f) The financial position of the employers is extremely
difficult.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. The Court, has considered the submissions from both parties
and the additional information invited and submitted subsequent to
the hearing. The Court also has taken into account Labour Court
Recommendation No. 10,669 and its impact on the claimants. In
addition the Court has taken into consideration the
Rationalisation Agreement draw up between the parties at national
level in 1981 (in particular clause 5.1 of that agreement) and
circular letter E.L.1/83.
The Court finds:
No evidence of any material change in the claimants'
duties since the application of the Rationalisation
Agreement referred to above.
The Court has also examined the range of duties carried out by the
claimants and Mobile Library Driver employed in Dublin Corporation
and finds that it would not be justified in recommending parity of
basic wage rate.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the claims.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
________________________
Deputy Chairman.
16th April, 1987.
A.K./J.C.