Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87282 Case Number: LCR11249 Section / Act: S67 Parties: UCC - and - ITGWU |
Dispute on behalf of 21 workers employed as general operatives concerning the interpretation of a 1981 agreement.
Recommendation:
5. In view of the fact that the claimants received an increase of
#6.44 per week which is in excess of the basic #4 recommended as
part of the Public Service Agreement of 1981, the Court is
satisfied that no injustice has been done to the claimants.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the claim.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87282 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11249
CC861186 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11249
Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Dispute on behalf of 21 workers employed as general operatives
concerning the interpretation of a 1981 agreement.
Background:
2. In 1981 an agreement was reached whereby existing general
operatives were recognised as having a special relationship with
U.C.C. craftsmen. The agreement provided for the general
operatives to be paid at 90% of the maximum basic rate of College
craftsmen. This was paid with effect from 1st August, 1980. In
December, 1981 the first phase of the Agreement on Pay in the
Public Service provided for an increase of 2% of basic pay or #4
aweek whichever is the greater for a period of 3 months from 1st
October, 1981. The College applied the 90% formula under this
phase and the workers received an increase of #3.60 aweek. The
Union are seeking to have the #4 aweek increase element
implemented. Discussions on the matter took place between the
parties and it was eventually referred to the Public Services
Monitoring Committee on 19th October, 1982. It was understood
that the matter was resolved in 1983, but it came to light in 1986
that this was not the case. The issue was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court on 9th July, 1986 and a
conciliation conference was held on the 21st August, 1986. As no
agreement was possible a request for an investigation and
recommendation by the Labour Court was received on 2nd March,
1987. A Court hearing was held in Cork on 29th April, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (a) The 1981 National Understanding was quite specific
where it states that an increase of 2% of basic pay or
#4 aweek which ever is the greater. The College had no
right to interpret the 1981 Agreement as they did thus
denying the workers the benefit of 40p aweek. The
Union contend that any entitlement under the 1981 Pay
agreement should be paid out and then if an anomaly
with the crafts rate is created the matter should be
dealt with then in that context.
(b) The College argue that the increase in analogues have
added to the workers rates. This is not valid as the
workers rates should not be substituted in whole or
part by another rate.
(c) The College gave no consideration to any logic other
than they applied the #4 aweek to the craft workers and
then proceeded to give the workers concerned 90% of
same. There was no other argument used by them at that
time.
College's arguments:
4. (i) The College have, since the implementation of the
agreement calculated the general operative rate as 90%
of the U.C.C. craft rate which includes all analogue
increases and national agreements.
(ii) The workers concerned received a total increase of
#6.44 aweek from 1st October, 1981. This included 90%
of an analogue increase of #3.15 granted to craftsmen
under the Local Government Staff Negotiations Board
agreement. The College contend that they were correct
in their application of the 1981 Public Service Pay
Agreement, as the workers did not receive anything less
than the minimum provided for in the Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. In view of the fact that the claimants received an increase of
#6.44 per week which is in excess of the basic #4 recommended as
part of the Public Service Agreement of 1981, the Court is
satisfied that no injustice has been done to the claimants.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
________________________
Deputy Chairman.
15th June, 1987.
M.D./J.C.