Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87166 Case Number: LCR11135 Section / Act: S67 Parties: IRISH LEAGUE OF CREDIT UNIONS - and - ASTMS |
Claim on behalf of 5 field officers for an increase in their salary scale.
Recommendation:
6. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, does not consider that a case exists for bringing the
salaries of the claimants into line with those of the managers in
the larger credit unions. The Court does not, therefore,
recommend concession of the claim.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Shiel Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87166 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11135
CC862046 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 11135
Parties: IRISH LEAGUE OF CREDIT UNIONS
and
ASSOCIATION OF SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND MANAGERIAL STAFFS
Subject:
1. Claim on behalf of 5 field officers for an increase in their
salary scale.
Background:
2. The League is the representative body of the Irish credit
union movement, and has 487 affiliated credit unions. It
currently employs 23 workers. The present salary scale of field
officers, of which there are five, ranges from #10,054.43 to
#12,618.73 per annum (as from 1st June, 1986) - one of the workers
is located in Northern Ireland and is paid in sterling.
3. A claim on behalf of the field officers for a review of the
salary scales was made in April, 1986 as part of the general claim
for the next wage round and this claim was then pursued
separately. At local level the Union claimed that the field
officers' salary should equate to that of managers of the larger
credit unions, while the League was of the opinion that the
present salary scale for field officers was adequate and that
there was no need for a revision of the scales. The matter was
referred on 4th December, 1986 to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court. A conciliation conference was held on 23rd
February, 1987 and, as no agreement was reached, the claim was
referred to the Labour Court on 5th March, 1987 for investigation
and recommendation. The Court investigated the dispute on 2nd
April, 1987.
Union's arguments:
4. (i) The field officer's job is generally to assist, advise
and assess credit unions throughout the country and
includes dealing with any financial imbalances that
arise (details supplied to the Court). The degree of
responsibility and knowledge required for a field
officer to carry out his duties competently are
comparable to the skills required of a manager of a
credit union, and on occasion it is necessary for field
officers to act as managers of credit unions on a
temporary basis.
(ii) The salaries of field officers should be similar to
those of managers of the larger credit unions. The
results of a survey of credit unions showed that
managers of the larger credit unions earned in the range
of #15,000 to #18,000 per annum, while in another group
of smaller credit unions managers earn approximately
#14,000 per annum. The salary scales of field officers
are much less favourable and most are now on the maximum
point of the scale. In many cases the workers concerned
are on a lower salary than the managers that they are
advising and assisting.
(iii) While it is difficult to compare workers in this area of
business with other areas, the post of Inspector of
Services in the Post Office is similar as regards duties
and involves a comparable degree of responsibility. An
Inspector of Services in the Post Office currently earns
approximately #17,000 per annum, which is again higher
than the salary of field officers.
(iv) The hours of work and travel involved in carrying out
the duties are unsociable (details supplied to the
Court) and as the credit union movement has enlarged,
the skills, knowledge and experience of the workers have
increased. Each officer covers a large area of the
country and a car is necessary to carry out the work
involved.
League's arguments:
5. (a) All workers in the League when taking up employment are
aware of the salary scales and conditions of employment.
There is no justification for changing the scale because
some workers have reached the top point. If the salary
scale was altered there would be consequential claims
from other categories of workers in the League. Field
officers have received salary increases in line with
those negotiated and agreed over the years in wage
rounds.
(b) From the annual review of the pension scheme operated by
the League, details are available on twenty of the
larger credit unions and include the salary ranges of
the managers concerned as at 1st March, 1987 - salaries
range from just over #9,000 to just over #18,000
(details supplied to the Court). Many of these are long
established credit unions and the present salaries are
the result of salaries negotiated at the time of setting
up. Of these 50% have a higher expenditure/income ratio
than that set out by the League. Of the other credit
unions, many of their managers and staff are on lower
salaries and do not receive other benefits such as
access to pension schemes, etc.
(c) The duties of field officers and credit union managers
are not directly comparable. Managers have, in many
cases, a longer working week and more varied hours, have
control and responsibility for staff which is not part
of the duties of a field officer, and are responsible to
the Board of Directors and members for day to day
administration which involves an expertise and knowledge
that a field officer would not necessarily have. In
addition, managers are responsible for the large
turnover of cash involved and in many cases require the
skills and knowledge necessary for computerisation.
(d) All field officers are members of a pension scheme
administered by the League and are covered by permanent
health insurance. Cars are provided for use both at
work and outside. Field Officers pay only for petrol
used in leisure hours, the Company is responsible for
all other costs.
(e) The duties of the field officer have remained
substantially the same over the years. It is impossible
to make comparisons with the duties of this post and
others, due to the nature of the organisation in which
it exists.
Recommendation:
6. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, does not consider that a case exists for bringing the
salaries of the claimants into line with those of the managers in
the larger credit unions. The Court does not, therefore,
recommend concession of the claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
11th May, 1987 Nicholas Fitzgerald
UM/PG Deputy Chairman