Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87379 Case Number: LCR11266 Section / Act: S67 Parties: U.C.C. - and - ITGWU |
Claim for full rate for a worker.
Recommendation:
5. In the circumstances of the claimants employment in U.C.C. and
taking into account the historical background to his employment
the Court is satisfied that he is in a unique position and should
be treated as a "red circle" case.
The Court accordingly recommends concession of the Unions claim.
Division:
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87379 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11266
CC861186 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11266
Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim for full rate for a worker.
Background:
2. In 1981 an agreement was reached between the Union and the
College that existing general operatives be paid an a personal
basic rate of 90% of the maximum basic rate of College craftsmen
and that all future entrants to the general operative grade
employed after the 1st June, 1981 be appointed on the Local
Government Staff Negotiations Board (L.G.S.N.B.) scale for general
operative. This latter provision was challenged by a worker who
had been in continuous employment with the College since 1970 and
who applied in 1984, in response to an advertisement for a post of
general operative at L.G.S.N.B. rate. The matter was referred to
a Rights Commissioner who in Recommendation RP196/85 stated inter
alia that workers who have been in full time employment with the
College prior to 1981 and who secure posts as general operatives
be paid on a personalised basis. On the basis of this
recommendation the Union on behalf of the worker concerned claimed
the personalised rate for general operative from 1983 the date he
was appointed to the sports section in a temporary capacity.
Prior to that he was employed on the College's farm from 1969, and
he did not wish to be transferred when the farm was moved to Fota.
Following the Rights Commissioner's recommendation the College
agreed to pay the worker the personalised rate from 20th January,
1986, the date of the Recommendation. The Union sought
retrospection to 1983. The matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court on 9th July, 1986. A
conciliation conference was held on 21st August, 1986. On 2nd
March, 1987 the Union requested that the issue be referred to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. The College
agreed to the referral and a Court hearing was held in Cork on
29th April, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (a) The Union reluctantly accepted a compromise agreement
on behalf of the worker in 1985 (details supplied to
the Court) and only re-opened the case in the light of
the different circumstances of the Rights
Commissioner's Recommendation. By agreeing to include
the worker concerned and applying the rate from 20th
January, 1986 the College have conceded the principle
that the worker was entitled to the rate.
(b) The College on their own admission did influence the
Rights Commissioner to broaden the scope of his
Recommendation. This resulted in an injustice to the
worker concerned as he did not do as well as other long
time permanent workers.
(c) The rate should apply from 28th February, 1983 as
neither the College nor the Rights Commissioner had the
right to make a Recommendation for a permanent worker
and then limit that entitlement by an influenced date
or included the worker in the Recommendation when he
was not present or represented at the hearing.
College's arguments:
4. (i) The Rights Commissioner dealt not only with the case in
hand, but stated the general conditions of application
of his recommendation to all potential applicants from
eligible College staff. He issued such a general
recommendation at the College's request, as, being
aware of the worker's situation, it brought his case
specifically to the Rights Commissioner's attention.
The reference in the recommendation to the date of the
application of the recommendation, therefore, was in
direct reference to the worker's situation. The other
worker had not yet taken up the offered post pending
the outcome of the case.
(ii) It was on the request of the College, in order that the
worker's could be covered by the terms of the
recommendation, that the recommendation was broadened.
This was done by the College with the express intention
of confining its application to a current date, as
stated by the Rights Commissioner and to upholding the
1981 agreement as amended by Recommendation RP196/85.
(iii) The finance committee of the College considered the
Rights Commissioner's Recommendation and its
applicability to both workers and accepted it on the
basis that it set very specific terms for allowing
exceptions to the 1981 agreement, which itself
constituted very specific terms for the wage
determination of existing and future General Operatives
employed in the College.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. In the circumstances of the claimants employment in U.C.C. and
taking into account the historical background to his employment
the Court is satisfied that he is in a unique position and should
be treated as a "red circle" case.
The Court accordingly recommends concession of the Unions claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
________________________
Deputy Chairman.
22nd June, 1987.
M.D./J.C.