Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87367 Case Number: LCR11280 Section / Act: S67 Parties: AnCO - and - FWUI |
Lump sum payment to the executive assistant grade (grade ii).
Recommendation:
5. Having in Recommendation No. 10276 recommended against
retrospection and since circumstances which gave rise to this have
not changed, the Court therefore does not recommend concession of
the claim for lump sums.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87367 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11280
CC87287 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11280
Parties: AN COMHAIRLE OILUNA
and
FEDERATED WORKERS' UNION OF IRELAND
Subject:
1. Lump sum payment to the executive assistant grade (grade ii).
Background:
2. There are 200 executive assistants employed by AnCO. The
grade corresponds to that of clerical officer in the civil
service. The Union, on behalf of the workers, served a claim on
the Authority for the payment of lump sums of between #118 on the
minimum point of the scale, to #495 on the maximum point of the
scale. The Union is seeking the payments in order to rectify what
it perceives as a major anomaly in respect of the salary levels of
the executive assistants in comparison with their counterparts
employed in the civil service. The Union seeks the award on the
basis of Labour Court Recommendation No. 10276 issued on 30th
January, 1986, which stated:
"Having regard to changes which have occurred since the
issue of Labour Court Recommendation No. 3940 the Court
is of the opinion that the Union's case in this matter
has been sustained and recommends concession of the
claim.
The Court does not recommend that the claim be conceded
retrospectively but, in the light of the present
stringent financial conditions recommends that the
parties meet to agree a phased introduction of the
salary adjustments arising."
The Authority advised the Union that the issue of lump sum
payments did not arise, and the organisation would not be making
such payments. Agreement was not reached at local level and on
10th February, 1987, the matter was referred to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court. A conciliation conference took place
on 31st March, 1987. Agreement was not reached and on 6th May,
1987, the matter was referred to the Labour for investigation and
recommendation. A Court hearing took place in Dublin on 5th June,
1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) The claim for executive assistants has been going on
since December, 1983.
(ii) The Union accepted the implementation of the Labour
Court Recommendation No. 10276 under the terms of the
25th pay round in good faith on the basis of AnCO's
letter of the 4th July, 1986 (details with Labour
Court).
The Union has outlined in comprehensive form
arrangements arrived at by the Government for similar
grades employed in the public services.
(iii) AnCO undertook by its letter to seek the extension of
these payments to the executive assistant grade but has
failed to honour the agreement.
(iv) It is unfair and inequitable to expect the executive
assistants not to be treated in a similar manner to
other public servants.
(v) This claim does not have any knock-on affect
inside/outside AnCO.
The Union considers that it has been conclusively proven that the
claim should be conceded on the basis of the information provided
to the Labour Court.
Authority's arguments:
4. (a) Labour Court Recommendation No. 10276 found in favour
of the Union's claim. Following discussions between
Management and the Union, it was agreed to implement
the award within the terms of the 25th round pay
agreement, which provided a mechanism for the phasing
in of special pay awards. This mechanism provided for
the award to be implemented in three phases, one third
from the 1st December, 1986 one third from the 1st
December, 1987, and the balance from the 1st July,
1988. The offer was formally extended to the Union and
accepted by them (details with Court).
(b) It is Management's view that this arrangement fully
complied with the Court's Recommendation that the
parties agree a phased introduction of the award, and
that the issue of ex gratia lump sums simply does not
arise.
(c) The claim which was pursued in the Labour Court, was to
align the scale of the AnCO executive assistant with
that of the civil service clerical officer. It was not
a claim for a "salary increase" per se. It sought a
particular relationship to be established. This has
been done. Its implementation, therefore, was not
subject to the type of arrangements which might have
been made in respect of other special salary claims in
the civil service.
(d) The Union has claimed that as a result of the teachers
and agricultural inspectors settlement, lump sum
payments have been extended to certain civil servants,
and to some other groups in the public service. The
payment of ex gratia lump sums to teachers and
agricultural inspectors arose because the terms of
their arbitrator's recommendation had been disimproved
by the Government. This did not happen in the case of
the executive assistants award.
(e) AnCO grades have specific relationships with civil
service grades, and no one else. Within the civil
service, no lump sum payments were made to the grade to
which executive assistants are related, as that grade
received no special award anyway.
(f) The following should be noted in relation to the
treatment of special awards in the civil service. The
Government position is that lump sums will apply only
to those groups which had received arbitrator's
recommendations, which were modified with the agreement
of the groups concerned. In the civil service, of
those who received the assistant principal
officer/principal officer special salary award, only
about half received lump sum payments. In any event,
this has no relevance for the claim by executive
assistants. The award has been accepted and is being
implemented as per the Labour Court Recommendation.
There is no justification whatever for the Union to now
seek a further improvement on the Labour Court
Recommendation by way of lump sum payments.
(g) As Management sees it the issue of lump sums does not
arise and arrangements arrived at for other bodies have
no relevance in the case of executive assistants in
AnCO. No lump sum payments have been made to their
analogous grade, that of clerical officer. Management
requests the Court to reject the Union's claim, and
find in favour of Management's position.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having in Recommendation No. 10276 recommended against
retrospection and since circumstances which gave rise to this have
not changed, the Court therefore does not recommend concession of
the claim for lump sums.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_____________________
Deputy Chairman
26th June, 1987
P.F./J.C.