Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87369 Case Number: LCR11545 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: TELECOM EIREANN - and - POOA |
Alleged breach of agreement concerning continuity of duties of acting night supervisors and claim for retrospection of pay to recently promoted supervisors.
Recommendation:
8. The claim made by the Association is the subject of continuing
negotiation with the Union recognised for the claimant category.
The Court recommends that these negotiations be concluded as soon
as possible and that the Association await and accept the outcome.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87369 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11545
SECTION 20(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1969
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11545
Parties: TELECOM EIREANN
and
POST OFFICE OFFICIALS' ASSOCIATION (P.O.O.A.)
Subject:
1. Alleged breach of agreement concerning continuity of duties of
acting night supervisors and claim for retrospection of pay to
recently promoted supervisors.
Background:
2. Promotion from the grade of night telephonist to that of night
supervisor grade II is by way of an "acting list". A single
acting list exists for all night telephonists in Dublin, so that
staff move from one location to another to perform substitution
duties. The acting list provides in a regular way for
substitution during the absence of higher officers and tests
fitness for promotion. At the International Telephone Exchange
night telephonists generally substituted only in their own area
and a number of staff were on continuous acting duties. This
situation was discontinued by the Company in early 1987 and the
decision was conveyed to the recognised Trade Unions by the
Company. The Post Office Officials Association is not recognised
as representing any grades within the Company.
3. Following negotiations at the Joint Conciliation Council
restructuring of the grades concerned was agreed. The old and new
structures are as follows: (Rates are pre - 26th round).
OLD STRUCTURE
Min. Max.
Chief Night Supervisor #12414 (5 pts) #13402
Night Supervisor I #11060 (6 pts) #12414
Night Supervisor II #9281 (7 pts) #11022
Night Telephonist #6785 (10 pts) #8759
NEW STRUCTURE
Min. Max.
Senior Chief Night Supervisor #13504 (6 pts) #15113
Chief Night Supervisor #12414 (5 pts) #13402
Night Supervisor #11060 (6 pts) #12414
Senior Night Telephonist #9281 (7 pts) #11022
Night Telephonist #6785 (10 pts) #8759
4. It was agreed that all Night Supervisors, Grade II would be
re-graded as Night Supervisors and that 188 Night Telephonists
(42% of the total number) would be re-graded as Senior Night
Telephonists. It was also agreed to promote the eight most senior
Night Telephonists on the acting list in the Central Telephone
Exchange to Night Supervisor Grade II in the old structure or
Night Supervisor in the new structure.
5. The P.O.O.A. objected to the fact that some senior acting
supervisors were restored to operating duties for periods of time
thus breaking the continuity of their supervisory duties. It
alleged that this was in breach of what was agreed in 1985. The
Association further sought that the effective date of promotion of
the night telephonists should be the date on which the individual
took up the vacant duty in an acting capacity. The Association
referred these matters to the Labour Court on 23rd April, 1987
under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A
Court hearing took place on 26th June, 1987 and reconvened on 12th
October, 1987 to consider further evidence presented by the
Association. Prior to the hearings the Association agreed to be
bound by the Court's recommendation.
Association's arguments:
6. (i) The Association considers that the Company has broken a
commitment entered into in 1985 that continuity of
supervisory duties would be guaranteed to the senior
group of acting supervisors substituting on vacant
positions. This commitment is referred to in Labour
Court Recommendation No. 10,009. These acting
supervisors were in fact returned to operating duties
for periods of time long enough to break the continuity
of their supervisory duties.
(ii) The Association considers that the eight officers were
promoted into existing vacant posts prior to any
restructuring and at a time when the ratio of
supervisors to operators was eight to one rather than
eleven to one. The Association is claiming
retrospective payment from the time when the posts
became vacant (i.e. the time when the officers first
filled them in an acting capacity). The Association
supplied various documents in support of its claim.
Company's arguments:
7. (a) The P.O.O.A. is not recognised as representing any
grades within the Company. The Company also points out
the existence of established industrial relations
procedures, principally the Transitional Scheme of
Conciliation and Arbitration of the Irish
Telecommunications Board.
(b) The Company rejects the claim that it broke any
agreement concerning continuity of duty of acting night
supervisors.
(c) As a result of modernisation of the telephone service,
the requirement for night supervisory posts has
declined. It has been agreed at the Joint Conciliation
Council that in future the number of night supervisor
posts will be determined on the basis of a one to
eleven ratio with night operators. The promotion of
the eight most senior night telephonists on the acting
list in the Central Telephone Exchange was also agreed.
The subject of the effective dates of these promotions
is the subject of ongoing discussions with the
recognised Trade Union. The following regulation
applies to a block of promotions:
"Where it is certain that several promotions from the
same grade will be made in a short period of time,
it is usually convenient to deal with them together.
As a rule the relative seniority of the officers
promoted will be maintained in such a case".
Concession of the Association's claim could give rise
to a situation where one or more of the eight promoted
could become senior to another officer promoted before
them. This would be a completely anomalous situation.
RECOMMENDATION:
8. The claim made by the Association is the subject of continuing
negotiation with the Union recognised for the claimant category.
The Court recommends that these negotiations be concluded as soon
as possible and that the Association await and accept the outcome.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
--------------------
Deputy Chairman
25th November, 1987.
A.K./J.C.