Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86955 Case Number: LCR11144 Section / Act: S67 Parties: UCG - and - IFUT |
Claim, by the Federation on behalf of 12 full time lecturers, for the revision of the hourly rate, on an annual basis, for evening and week-end lectures and the indexing of the rate to general wage increases.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions from both
parties, recommends the concession of the Federation's claim for a
revision of the payments in question in October each year on the
basis outlined in their claim and that this revision be applied
retrospectively to October, 1985.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86955 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11144
CC861231 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11144
Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE GALWAY
and
IRISH FEDERATION OF UNIVERSITY TEACHERS
Subject:
1. Claim, by the Federation on behalf of 12 full time lecturers,
for the revision of the hourly rate, on an annual basis, for
evening and week-end lectures and the indexing of the rate to
general wage increases.
Background:
2. The College conducts a number of degree courses for students
who are already in employment. Lectures are generally given in
the evening and at week-ends, to facilitate the people attending
the courses. The lecturers are paid at a fixed rate, irrespective
of their status within the College. In May, 1985, the Federation
noticed that the rate of #15 had not been adjusted by the
percentage elements in general wage rounds since July, 1982. An
explanation was sought and the College responded, saying that the
situation would be reviewed in November, 1985. The Federation
heard nothing further on the matter until 5th June, 1986, when the
College stated that the new rate with effect from 1st October,
1985, would be #17. The College also indicated that the rate
would be reviewed on a periodic rather than annual basis. This
was not acceptable to the Federation, who argued such an
arrangement was in contrast with N.U.I. practice generally, also
the Federation estimated the rate should have been #18.08 from 1st
October, 1985 and #18.62 from 1st February, 1986. The parties
could not settle the issue locally and on 22nd July, 1986, it was
referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. An
invitation to a conciliation conference was issued on the 23rd
July, a response was received on 10th October and a conciliation
conference was held on 11th November, 1986. The College indicated
that it was willing to increase the rate to #18.20 and give an ex
gratia additional #1 per lecture for those lectures given in
1985/86. The College also stated that it's policy was to review
the rate from time to time, independent of salary movements and in
these circumstances felt that retrospection was not justified.
The Federation argued that the rate was out of line with similar
payments in other colleges. The Federation wanted a commitment to
be given to review henceforth the rate in question on 1st October
each year, whereby the percentage elements in general wage rounds
during the preceding 12 months would be applied to it, as is the
case with other special payments in U.C.G. and all special
payments in other colleges. They also felt that the amount on
offer was short of what it should be if the rate had been adjusted
in line with salary. There being no agreement between the parties
the matter was referred, on 2nd December, 1986, to the Labour
Court, for investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing took
place on 25th March, 1987, in Galway.
Federation's arguments:
3. (a) The College has said that the situation in U.C.G. is
not out of line with U.C.D. and T.C.D. however, these
references in connection with the method of reviewing
extra lecture payments are irrelevant since such
payments do not exist in these colleges.
(b) Similarly, it has been stated that, from the time when
these payments were introduced in 1968 to July, 1982,
there was no systematic review. The point is that it
was on the latter date that the Federation brought up
the issue and it is in relation to the period since
then that the Federation's case exists.
(c) It has been suggested that, as it was not written down
in 1982, when a new rate was introduced, that future
reviews would have regard to the percentage elements in
wage agreements, this cannot therefore be assumed.
However, the other off-scale payments and allowances in
the College (e.g. exam payments and children's
allowances) and all payments, including extra lecture
payments, in other colleges are indexed to wage
agreements.
(d) The Federation feels that it should be appreciated that
the immediate costs of the payments is very limited.
For 1986/87, the extra 42p claimed, amounts to #21 per
person. If lump sum retrospection were given, a
suggestion that the College has refused, it would cost
about #3,600 in toto.
College's arguments:
4. (i) There is no established link between National Wage
Agreements (N.W.A.) and the rates paid for evening
degree courses. Similarly, there is no established
pattern in the claims made by the Federation on behalf
of it's members. In the past the College has raised
the rates without any claim being made.
(ii) On a practical level, it is apparent that rates should
be fixed at the beginning of the academic term and not
in accordance with other dates, as would be required by
any linking. While the College is prepared to review
rates on a regular basis, it would not wish to be
confined by any direct linkage system.
(iii) When one compares the rate in 1979 and the rate
approved from October, 1986, there has in effect been a
65% increase. The cumulative N.W.A. percentage
increase for the period October, 1980, to 1986, only
gives an increase of 56%.
(iv) While an increase in the evening lecture rate for
full-time staff members might not in itself carry a
large cost implication, the corresponding increase in
part-time rates which are directly linked to them would
have much more serious consequences. Given the
resources available to the College, this could cause a
reduction in the level of part-time teaching, which is
a price the College is not prepared to pay.
(v) The policy of U.C.G., in making payments to full-time
staff for evening lecturing is much more favourable
than other colleges. Besides U.C.G. only U.C.C.
adopted the policy of paying in respect of such
services.
(vi) The College does not accept that the payments claimed
should be retrospective. As it is the rate offered is
only 42p below what is being sought by the Federation
and in previous settlements the rate has been only
marginally below and in some cases higher than that
claimed.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions from both
parties, recommends the concession of the Federation's claim for a
revision of the payments in question in October each year on the
basis outlined in their claim and that this revision be applied
retrospectively to October, 1985.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
____________________________
Deputy Chairman.
26th April, 1987.
B.O'N./J.C.