Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87306 Case Number: LCR11339 Section / Act: S67 Parties: BORD NA GCON - and - MPGWU |
Claim by the Union for: (a) the restructuring of salary scales of nine racing track managers, (b) the restructuring of salary scales of thirteen control stewards, and (c) the restructuring of salary scales of three stipendiary stewards.
Recommendation:
12. The Court considers that the evidence presented by the
parties is insufficient to allow a judgement to be made as to
whether a restructuring of the salary scales of the claimants is
merited at this time. In particular, considerably more details
would be necessary in regard to alleged changes in duties and
responsibilities of the posts since the existing scales were last
set, particularly as there is disagreement between the parties as
to whether changes in duties have actually occurred. The Court is
of the view that the best way of processing the claim is for the
parties to appoint an agreed assessor to examine and make
recommendations on the claim. In the event of the parties being
unable to agree on an assessor the Court is prepared to nominate
one.
The Court recommends accordingly.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87306 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11339
CC861106 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 11339
PARTIES: BORD NA GCON
and
MARINE PORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim by the Union for:
(a) the restructuring of salary scales of nine racing track
managers,
(b) the restructuring of salary scales of thirteen control
stewards, and
(c) the restructuring of salary scales of three stipendiary
stewards.
General background:
2. In early 1986, the Union submitted general restructuring
claims on behalf of the three groups. The Department of the
Public Service indicated to the Bord that no claims should be
processed without receiving a detailed submission supporting the
claim. The matter was referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court and at a conciliation conference held on 3rd July,
1986, the Bord's position was explained and it was agreed that the
Union would forward a detailed submission on each claim. At a
resumed conciliation conference on 9th April, 1987, (an earlier
date being cancelled by the Bord), the Bord indicated that in its
view there was no merit in the claims and that the Department of
the Public Service had instructed that no offer was to be made.
This was not acceptable to the Union and on 13th March, 1987, the
matter was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. A Court hearing took place in Limerick, on 3rd
June, 1987.
CLAIM A: RACING TRACK MANAGERS
Background:
3. The present salary scale of racing managers is based on a
three tier system as follows;
Scale A #13,078 x 3 increments to #14,229
Scale B #12,391 x 3 increments to #13,613
Scale C #10,340 x 3 increments to #11,573.
On 11th March, 1986, the Union proposed that the scales should be
restructured in the following manner:
Scale A #15,200 x 4 increments of #17,600
Scale B #14,500 x 4 increments of #16,900
Scale C #13,400 x 4 increments of #15,800.
The Union contended that the managers are underpaid for the job
that they do. The Bord was of the view that an increase was not
justified.
Union's arguments:
4. (a) The Union believes that racing managers throughout the
country are grossly underpaid for the responsible job
that they do. They have responsibility for such
matters as staff, bank transactions, security and
control of the gate.
(b) Over the years the racing manager's job has changed
both in content and nature, as well as having extra
responsibilities. These responsibilities include
unrecorded trials, stewards enquiries, sponsorship and
promotion (details provided to the Court).
(c) By the very nature of the job the managers have to
work unsocial hours. At the present time the rates of
pay do not carry any recognition for these hours. In
the recent past most tracks closed for a 'Winter
Break'. There is now a trend, however, not to have an
off season. Added to this is the trend towards extra
races on the programmes. These increased duties are
not reflected in pay
(d) The Bord's incentive scheme has brought in extra
revenue and most people involved in the industry are
benefiting. The managers feel that their efforts
contribute to the success of the scheme, therefore
they believe that they should receive some benefit
from the scheme.
Bord's arguments:
5. (i) In 1977, the Labour Court had the racing manager's job
assessed and new salary scales were set in Labour
Court Recommendation No. 4418. In making the
recommendation the Court took into account all aspects
of the job, including unsocial hours and the
flexibility given in working such hours. The work
content has not been altered in the interim.
(ii) The Bord is of the view that the Union has not
substantiated its claim and therefore no increase is
justified.
CLAIM B: CONTROL STEWARDS
Background:
6. The present salary scales for control stewards is based on a
two tier system as follows:
Scale A : #9217 per annum
Scale B : #5600 per annum (part-time).
On 11th March, 1986, the Union proposed that the scales for
control stewards should "be assimilated onto the Civil Service
Executive Officer Grade, which is a scale from #9,488 x 8
increments to a maximum of #12,685". The Union contended that the
current scale does not adequately reflect the responsibility of
the control stewards. The Bord maintained that an increase was
not justified.
Union's arguments:
7. (a) The Union feels that the present system of payment
does not reflect the service of the control stewards,
even though most of them have long service in the
industry and have been at the top of the scale for a
long time.
(b) The control stewards have to work unsocial hours,
which is not reflected in their pay. Indeed, they are
the only group within the Bord who do not receive
extra payment for Bank Holiday working. The tendency
towards extra races on a programme and the lengthening
of the season is not adequately reflected.
(c) The responsibility of control stewards has increased
over the years with no extra payment being made. The
control stewards are now responsible for carrying out
'dope tests' on dogs at certain times and they must
also share the responsibility of attendance at the
traps.
Bord's arguments:
8. (i) The position of control steward with the Bord is
part-time. The control stewards also work for the
Irish Coursing Club in the marking of greyhounds and
attending coursing meetings. Scale A control stewards
could be considered full-time workers in the industry,
but part-time in the Bord.
(ii) Prior to 1981, control stewards were paid a fee of
#11.55 in respect of each meeting and a fee of #2.55
in respect of each trial session attended. However,
following discussions between the Bord and the Union a
basic salary to include payment for all racing and
trials at the tracks was agreed and implemented in
1981, as follows:
Scale A #5000 per annum
Scale B #3000 per annum
Control stewards have benefitted substantially from
this agreement and have received full application of
terms of National Wage Agreements since then. The
work content of stewards has not changed over the
years.
CLAIM C: STIPENDIARY STEWARDS
Background:
9. The current salary scale of stipendiary stewards is a single
grade structure rising from #8,358 x 10 increments to #11,772
(car, tax, insurance and petrol expenses are also provided). On
11th March, 1986, the Union submitted a claim that the stipendiary
stewards be assimilated onto the Civil Service Higher Executive
Officer salary scale, which rises from #12,685 x 7 increments to a
maximum of #15,235. The Union contended that the stipendiary
stewards were not being paid for the very responsible duties that
they carry out. The Bord was of the view that the claim was not
justified.
Union's arguments:
10. (a) The stipendiary stewards are by nature of appointment
the senior stewards and have responsibility to ensure
that all officials carry out their duties in the
manner laid down by the regulations. As a result they
must ensure liaison between the officials and the Bord
and they have to be totally conversant with the
various duties and responsibilities of all officials
and owners.
(b) The stipendiary stewards often have to carry out the
duties of racing managers, control stewards and levy
collectors, as well their own duties (details provided
to the Court).
(c) The volume of work and area covered has increased
dramatically for the stipendiary steward as a result
of the non-replacement of two others. They are now
obliged to attend sales and travel extra miles to get
to their place of employment, often having to stay
overnight.
(d) Following Labour Court Recommendation No. 4851 the
stipendiary stewards were given equality with Higher
Clerical Officers within the Bord. As a result of
productivity agreement between the Bord and the Higher
Clerical Officers there is now a shortfall of #1500
between them and the stipendiary stewards.
(e) The stipendiary stewards have been contributing to
ongoing productivity talks and have been obliged to
participate in a productivity scheme concerning levy
collection with only a lump sum payment in 1985 in
return.
Bord's arguments:
11. (i) The Bord is of the opinion that the Union has no
grounds for an increase in the salary scales. Until
1985, four stipendiary stewards were employed,
however, one was then appointed as a racing manager
and due to the embargo on the recruitment in the
public service was not replaced. The Union claimed he
should be replaced and the matter was the subject of a
Rights Commissioner hearing. In his recommendation he
held that the Bord was not compelled to employ a
fourth person and recommended that the Union accept
the position with liberty to seek negotiations on the
consequence of the reduced manning.
(ii) The Labour Court in Recommendation No. 4851 of 1978
found that the appropriate salary scale for
stipendiary stewards was the Higher Clerical Officer
grade in the Bord. However, this relationship was
effectively ended in 1979, as a result of a
productivity agreement - a view upheld by the Labour
Court in Recommendation No. 6932 of 1982.
(iii) Special increases applicable to executive grades in
the Civil Service had been applicable to stipendiary
stewards by virtue of the comparison with the Higher
Clerical Officers in the Bord. The Union pursued a
claim for the application of 6% special phased
increase retrospective to October, 1983. The
Department of th Public Service conveyed sanction for
th 6% payment to be phased in accordance with clause
3.3 of the 25th Pay Round Agreement, on the basis that
adjudication hearings had taken place after 1st
January, 1986. The Union is aware that the Department
has since reiterated this decision.
RECOMMENDATION:
12. The Court considers that the evidence presented by the
parties is insufficient to allow a judgement to be made as to
whether a restructuring of the salary scales of the claimants is
merited at this time. In particular, considerably more details
would be necessary in regard to alleged changes in duties and
responsibilities of the posts since the existing scales were last
set, particularly as there is disagreement between the parties as
to whether changes in duties have actually occurred. The Court is
of the view that the best way of processing the claim is for the
parties to appoint an agreed assessor to examine and make
recommendations on the claim. In the event of the parties being
unable to agree on an assessor the Court is prepared to nominate
one.
The Court recommends accordingly.
~
Signed on behal of the Labour Court
24th July, 1987 Nicholas Fitzgerald
B.O'N./P.W. Deputy Chairman