Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87924 Case Number: LCR11574 Section / Act: S67 Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN - and - T.A.S.S. |
Dispute concerning the proposed redundancy of a technician in the College's diagnostic laboratories.
Recommendation:
The Court, having regard to the terms of LCR9992, the terms of the
claimant's appointment and the terms of the Plan for National
Recovery, recommends that this worker should not be made
compulsorily redundant and that the terms of clause 2 of the
productivity agreement should apply.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Collins Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87924 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11574
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
and
T.A.S.S.
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the proposed redundancy of a technician in
the College's diagnostic laboratories.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned previously worked for seven years as a
laboratory technician with the Institute of Clinical Pharmacology.
In November, 1986, he answered an advertisement for a vacancy in
the College's diagnostic laboratories, was interviewed and
subsequently offered the job. He accepted the offer and took up
employment on the 9th February, 1987. In June, he was verbally
advised that his employment might not be continued due to a major
downturn in activity. This was confirmed in writing in November
and he was served with dismissal notice, effective from the 11th
December, 1987. The Union objected to this but despite local
level discussions between the parties, no progress could be made
and on the 3rd November, the issue was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference held on the 1st December failed to resolve the issue
and the matter was referred to the Labour Court. The Court
investigated the dispute on the 8th December, 1987, and a letter
recommendation issued to both parties on the same day.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The claimant took up the appointment in the College on
the understanding that it was a permanent position and he was
so informed at the interview stage. In addition, he took a
drop in salary to take up this post.
2. The College was aware of the workload situation in
Diagnostics and this was the subject of a previous Labour
Court recommendation (LCR 9992 refers). Indeed, the fact
that the College took on a temporary technician at the same
time was recognition of this. This temporary technician has
now been let go.
3. At both local level and at conciliation, the Union sought
to have the terms of LCR9992 applied to this case, i.e. "that
the parties enter into negotiations under Clause 2 of the
Productivity and Efficiency Agreement" and at conciliation
the Union pointed out a number of suitable posts that had
been recently advertised internally in the College. Clause 2
reads as follows -
"Where it does not already apply mobility of all
technical staff between departments will be introduced.
Technicians will transfer from one department to another
on a temporary basis. In so far as permanent transfers
would be concerned, these would take place subject to
consultation and agreement. Where it does not already
apply, reasonable flexibility in work undertaken will be
introduced when duties of technicians and other grades
overlap. The following are examples of
mobility/flexibility.
(a) a technician in a department where the volume of
work had declined could be transferred to a more
active department.
(b) a technician could be transferred from one
department to another in the event of a shortage of
staff there arising from absence because of illness
or holidays".
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Diagnostic Laboratories provide a testing service for
hospitals and medical practitioners and employ approximately
forty members of staff. They are, and since their
establishment have been, financially separate from the
College. The staff are employed by the College but their
employment costs and all other expenses are met from the
Laboratories' revenue. The Laboratories have never been
funded by the College or by the Higher Education Authority.
Over a period of about twenty five years the Laboratories
were successful and self-financing and had accumulated a
substantial surplus. However, in the years 1978 to 1983
inclusive, they suffered substantial losses which effectively
wiped out the previously accumulated supplies. In fact, at
one stage, they appeared to be threatened with closure.
However, the combined efforts of Management and staff, aided
by improved financial control and staff reduction effected a
remarkable improvement and the laboratories' future looked
much brighter until May this year. In May and subsequent
months the level of turnover has been approximately 30% lower
than the level for the corresponding period last year and
there is no sign of any improvement. The work available,
therefore, does not justify the retention of the claimant and
it has proved necessary to dismiss him.
2. During discussions at conciliation the Union invoked
Labour Court Recommendation 9992 which refers to the transfer
of technicians. Unfortunately, there is no scope for the
transfer of the claimant within the Diagnostic Laboratories
as all sections are at least adequately staffed at present.
The question of his transfer to a Department in the College
was raised but that option is not open to the College. As a
result of grant reductions the College is expected to achieve
a reduction of total expenditure in 1988 as follows -
Pay Expenditure 5.5% (#1.85m)
Non-Pay Expenditure 14.4% (#2.1m)
Total Expenditure 8.2% (#3.95m)
3. To achieve the pay expenditure cuts it will be necessary
to reduce staff numbers by 152 full time equivalents by an
average date of 1st May, 1988. There is no scope for the
re-deployment of a technician from the Diagnostic Laboratory
to the College as this would result in a requirement that 153
full time equivalents should be let go rather than 152. It
might also mean that some long-serving staff member would
need to be released to make way for a new transfer from the
Diagnostic Laboratory.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court, having regard to the terms of LCR9992, the terms of the
claimant's appointment and the terms of the Plan for National
Recovery, recommends that this worker should not be made
compulsorily redundant and that the terms of clause 2 of the
productivity agreement should apply.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
21st December, 1987 John M. Horgan
D.H./P.W. Chairman