Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87523 Case Number: LCR11370 Section / Act: S67 Parties: UCD - and - ASTMS |
Claims on behalf of 32 administrative and secretarial staff for: (a) increased annual leave (b) introduction of service leave (c) Union representation on the sub-committee on Administrative and Secretarial Salaries and Promotions.
Recommendation:
12. The Court, having considered the submissions from both
parties, recommends as follows in relation to the three aspects of
the claim:
Annual Leave - The Court does not recommend concession of the
claim.
Service Leave - The Court does not recommend concession of the
claim.
Representation on the Sub-Committee:
The Court is of the view that the Union has a justifiable concern
with the present situation. Accordingly, the Court recommends
that between the issue of this recommendation and the 30th April,
1988, the parties should meet and draw up agreed application
procedures, objective criteria and reporting system for promotion
within the grades concerned. The Court condsiders that if
agreement on the above is reached, the Union should not pursue its
claim for staff representatives on the Finance Sub-Committee.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Shiel Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87523 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11370
CC87786 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11370
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
AND
ASSOCIATION OF SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND MANAGERIAL STAFFS
SUBJECT:
1. Claims on behalf of 32 administrative and secretarial staff
for:
(a) increased annual leave
(b) introduction of service leave
(c) Union representation on the sub-committee on
Administrative and Secretarial Salaries and Promotions.
BACKGROUND:
2. In February, 1987, the Union raised the above claims at a
meeting with the College Authorities. These were rejected by the
College and as no local level settlement was possible, the issues
were referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court on
the 12th May, 1987. No agreement could be reached at a
conciliation conference held on the 22nd June, and the matter was
referred to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation.
A Court hearing was held on the 30th July, 1987.
CLAIM (A) - Increased Annual Leave:
BACKGROUND:
3. Annual leave entitlement for the executive and senior
executive assistants is 18 days (21 days for administrative I and
II grades). However, some staff in these grades have 23 days
annual leave due to the fact that they commenced employment prior
to 1975 when the College used to close for holy days. When this
practice ceased, staff recruited prior to 1975 were given five
days leave in lieu of Church holidays.
Union's arguments:
4. (a) The present annual leave system in the College is
anomalous and annual leave should be the same for all,
i.e. 23 days holidays for the administrative and
secretarial staff.
(b) The extra leave applies to 34% of the existing staff.
College's arguments:
5. (a) Prior to the 1st January, 1975, administrative and
secretarial staff enjoyed church holidays as free days.
With effect from that date the concession was abolished
and staff employed at the time were compensated on the
basis of an arrangement whereby they were granted an
additional five-free days per calendar year, to be
taken by arrangement with their Heads of Department.
There was no entitlement to take these days
consecutively with annual leave. A further proviso
stipulated that should any additional national public
holidays be created in the future, a corresponding
reduction in the five days would be made.
(b) The number of persons who enjoy the additional leave
has gradually diminished as staff members resign or
retire. Those employed after the 1st January, 1975,
never enjoyed church holidays as free days and had no
entitlement to them. The College considers that there
is no reason why that entitlement should now be
extended to staff other than those who already enjoy
it.
(c) The holiday entitlements of the executive
assistant/senior executive assistant grades in the
College compare very favourably with comparable grades
in other colleges (details supplied to the Court).
CLAIM (B) - Introduction of Service Leave:
BACKGROUND:
6. At present no form of service leave exists in the College and
the Union is seeking two days after five years and three days
after ten years.
Union's arguments:
7. (a) While service leave does not exist in UCD it does exist
in University College Cork, Trinity College Dublin and
other semi-state organisations. Additional leave of
three days exists for those promoted to the grade of
Administrative Officer I and II and Senior
Administrative Officers. Unfortunately the number of
promotions are few for the administrative and
secretarial staff and one could be on the College staff
for 20 - 25 years with 18 or 23 days annual holidays.
(b) During the course of the conciliation conference the
Union indicated that it was prepared to consider having
service leave implemented in such a way that it would
eliminate the anomaly in the annual leave among the
staff.
College's argument:
8. (a) Service leave does not apply to any grade in the
College at present and Management is opposed to its
introduction. If service leave was introduced for the
executive and senior executive grades, claims on behalf
of other grades, both administrative and
non-administrative, would inevitably follow. The cost
implications of the claim and of the consequent claims
which would follow are difficult to estimate but there
is no doubt that they would be significant. The
College faces severe financial cutbacks this year and
next year and is obliged to resist more firmly than
ever any claim which would worsen its financial
position.
CLAIM (C) - Union representation on the sub-committee on
Administrative and Secretarial Salaries and
Promotions:
BACKGROUND:
9. The sub-committee in question is part of the Finance
Committee and it generally meets once a year, usually in June.
The purpose of this meeting is to assess applications for
promotion/upgrading and approve increases in salary. At present
its membership is made up of the President, Secretary/Bursar, the
Registrar and two other members of the Finance Committee who are
members of the academic staff. The Union is requesting that two
of its members should be allowed to go on this sub-committee.
Union's arguments:
10. (a) The Union representatives would be far more familiar
with the day-to-day duties of College departmental
secretarial and administrative staff in general and
would be in constant contact with members of staff on
those grades. Academics cannot be expected to become
familiar with and know the duties of the entire
administrative and secretarial staff.
(b) The representatives would help to ensure that careful
and fair consideration would be given to each
applicant and application submitted and that adequate
documentation would be available in order to assess
each candidate fairly.
(c) Union representatives on this sub-committee would
inspire confidence in general in it and in the
non-academic promotional procedure. At present the
procedure is very poor and staff are never informed of
when to apply and to whom, what the format of
applications should be and what the precise criteria
for applications are. Reasons are not give in the
event of an application being unsuccessful and no
suggestion are made regarding areas where improvements
could be effected.
College's argument:
11. (a) It is the practice to appoint to this sub-committee
members of the Finance Committee only. The Union is
claiming that it should include representatives of the
administrative staff but the College is not in favour
of this proposal as it considers that the
sub-committee is sufficiently broadly based and is
suitably impartial. Furthermore, it is not convinced
that the addition of an administrative staff
representative would enhance its effectiveness or
would bring about any other improvement.
RECOMMENDATION:
12. The Court, having considered the submissions from both
parties, recommends as follows in relation to the three aspects of
the claim:
Annual Leave - The Court does not recommend concession of the
claim.
Service Leave - The Court does not recommend concession of the
claim.
Representation on the Sub-Committee:
The Court is of the view that the Union has a justifiable concern
with the present situation. Accordingly, the Court recommends
that between the issue of this recommendation and the 30th April,
1988, the parties should meet and draw up agreed application
procedures, objective criteria and reporting system for promotion
within the grades concerned. The Court condsiders that if
agreement on the above is reached, the Union should not pursue its
claim for staff representatives on the Finance Sub-Committee.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
24th August, 1987. Evelyn Owens,
DH/MF Deputy Chairman.
CD87523 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11370
CC87786 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11370
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
AND
ASSOCIATION OF SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND MANAGERIAL STAFFS
SUBJECT:
1. Claims on behalf of 32 administrative and secretarial staff
for:
(a) increased annual leave
(b) introduction of service leave
(c) Union representation on the sub-committee on
Administrative and Secretarial Salaries and Promotions.
BACKGROUND:
2. In February, 1987, the Union raised the above claims at a
meeting with the College Authorities. These were rejected by the
College and as no local level settlement was possible, the issues
were referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court on
the 12th May, 1987. No agreement could be reached at a
conciliation conference held on the 22nd June, and the matter was
referred to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation.
A Court hearing was held on the 30th July, 1987.
CLAIM (A) - Increased Annual Leave:
BACKGROUND:
3. Annual leave entitlement for the executive and senior
executive assistants is 18 days (21 days for administrative I and
II grades). However, some staff in these grades have 23 days
annual leave due to the fact that they commenced employment prior
to 1975 when the College used to close for holy days. When this
practice ceased, staff recruited prior to 1975 were given five
days leave in lieu of Church holidays.
Union's arguments:
4. (a) The present annual leave system in the College is
anomalous and annual leave should be the same for all,
i.e. 23 days holidays for the administrative and
secretarial staff.
(b) The extra leave applies to 34% of the existing staff.
College's arguments:
5. (a) Prior to the 1st January, 1975, administrative and
secretarial staff enjoyed church holidays as free days.
With effect from that date the concession was abolished
and staff employed at the time were compensated on the
basis of an arrangement whereby they were granted an
additional five-free days per calendar year, to be
taken by arrangement with their Heads of Department.
There was no entitlement to take these days
consecutively with annual leave. A further proviso
stipulated that should any additional national public
holidays be created in the future, a corresponding
reduction in the five days would be made.
(b) The number of persons who enjoy the additional leave
has gradually diminished as staff members resign or
retire. Those employed after the 1st January, 1975,
never enjoyed church holidays as free days and had no
entitlement to them. The College considers that there
is no reason why that entitlement should now be
extended to staff other than those who already enjoy
it.
(c) The holiday entitlements of the executive
assistant/senior executive assistant grades in the
College compare very favourably with comparable grades
in other colleges (details supplied to the Court).
CLAIM (B) - Introduction of Service Leave:
BACKGROUND:
6. At present no form of service leave exists in the College and
the Union is seeking two days after five years and three days
after ten years.
Union's arguments:
7. (a) While service leave does not exist in UCD it does exist
in University College Cork, Trinity College Dublin and
other semi-state organisations. Additional leave of
three days exists for those promoted to the grade of
Administrative Officer I and II and Senior
Administrative Officers. Unfortunately the number of
promotions are few for the administrative and
secretarial staff and one could be on the College staff
for 20 - 25 years with 18 or 23 days annual holidays.
(b) During the course of the conciliation conference the
Union indicated that it was prepared to consider having
service leave implemented in such a way that it would
eliminate the anomaly in the annual leave among the
staff.
College's argument:
8. (a) Service leave does not apply to any grade in the
College at present and Management is opposed to its
introduction. If service leave was introduced for the
executive and senior executive grades, claims on behalf
of other grades, both administrative and
non-administrative, would inevitably follow. The cost
implications of the claim and of the consequent claims
which would follow are difficult to estimate but there
is no doubt that they would be significant. The
College faces severe financial cutbacks this year and
next year and is obliged to resist more firmly than
ever any claim which would worsen its financial
position.
CLAIM (C) - Union representation on the sub-committee on
Administrative and Secretarial Salaries and
Promotions:
BACKGROUND:
9. The sub-committee in question is part of the Finance
Committee and it generally meets once a year, usually in June.
The purpose of this meeting is to assess applications for
promotion/upgrading and approve increases in salary. At present
its membership is made up of the President, Secretary/Bursar, the
Registrar and two other members of the Finance Committee who are
members of the academic staff. The Union is requesting that two
of its members should be allowed to go on this sub-committee.
Union's arguments:
10. (a) The Union representatives would be far more familiar
with the day-to-day duties of College departmental
secretarial and administrative staff in general and
would be in constant contact with members of staff on
those grades. Academics cannot be expected to become
familiar with and know the duties of the entire
administrative and secretarial staff.
(b) The representatives would help to ensure that careful
and fair consideration would be given to each
applicant and application submitted and that adequate
documentation would be available in order to assess
each candidate fairly.
(c) Union representatives on this sub-committee would
inspire confidence in general in it and in the
non-academic promotional procedure. At present the
procedure is very poor and staff are never informed of
when to apply and to whom, what the format of
applications should be and what the precise criteria
for applications are. Reasons are not give in the
event of an application being unsuccessful and no
suggestion are made regarding areas where improvements
could be effected.
College's argument:
11. (a) It is the practice to appoint to this sub-committee
members of the Finance Committee only. The Union is
claiming that it should include representatives of the
administrative staff but the College is not in favour
of this proposal as it considers that the
sub-committee is sufficiently broadly based and is
suitably impartial. Furthermore, it is not convinced
that the addition of an administrative staff
representative would enhance its effectiveness or
would bring about any other improvement.
RECOMMENDATION:
12. The Court, having considered the submissions from both
parties, recommends as follows in relation to the three aspects of
the claim:
Annual Leave - The Court does not recommend concession of the
claim.
Service Leave - The Court does not recommend concession of the
claim.
Representation on the Sub-Committee:
The Court is of the view that the Union has a justifiable concern
with the present situation. Accordingly, the Court recommends
that between the issue of this recommendation and the 30th April,
1988, the parties should meet and draw up agreed application
procedures, objective criteria and reporting system for promotion
within the grades concerned. The Court condsiders that if
agreement on the above is reached, the Union should not pursue its
claim for staff representatives on the Finance Sub-Committee.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
24th August, 1987. Evelyn Owens,
DH/MF Deputy Chairman.