Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88772 Case Number: LCR12158 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: AN POST - and - A GROUP OF WORKERS |
Dispute concerning alleged loss of earnings and promotional opportunities for acting postal sorters.
Recommendation:
5. The Court considers that to the extent that any of the
claimants have a grievance (and the Court takes no view on this
question) it should be resolved through the normal trade union and
industrial relations channels. The Court therefore recommends
that the issues be taken up by the claimants with their trade
union.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Heffernan Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88772 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12158
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: AN POST
and
A GROUP OF WORKERS
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning alleged loss of earnings and promotional
opportunities for acting postal sorters.
BACKGROUND:
2. The workers concerned are postmen/postwomen who are working as
postal sorters in an acting capacity, some allegedly since 1985.
They claim that their services are no longer required in the
postal sorters grade following the implementation of a
productivity agreement between An Post and the Postal and
Telecommunications Workers' Union (PTWU) (of which the claimants
are members) and that the failure of the Company to appoint them
to the postal sorters grade has resulted in significant loss of
earnings for them. This has been rejected by the Company.
Following their failure to have the matter dealt with at local
level, the Group referred the matter to the Labour Court under
Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, on the 10th
October, 1988, agreeing to be bound by the Court's recommendation.
A Court hearing was held on the 21st November, 1988.
WORKERS' ARGUMENTS:
3.1 The claimants feel that the length of time spent on the
acting sorters grade is totally unreasonable without a
commitment from An Post as to the future of their careers.
They are therefore seeking a written commitment from An Post
that they will all be appointed in the near future.
3.2 Prior to any productivity agreement there were 50 vacancies
in the postal sorters grade. Twenty-two of these were
disputed by the postal sorters branch for reasons unknown to
the claimants. An Post should give a reason why these 22
duties were disputed and why acting postal sorters were not
appointed when the vacancies existed.
3.3 Acting postal sorters have continually acted against duties
on the sorters grade. Since the implementation of the
productivity agreement they are not acting against duties but
remain on the sorters grade. By not acting against a duty,
they lose their acting allowance against the said duty. If
they had been appointed they would have received a
substantial sum in back money.
3.4 The claimants feel they are discriminated against in that as
acting postal sorters they are not allowed perform sorters'
duties even though they remain on the sorters grade. This
ruling was introduced by the postal sorters branch of the
PTWU and it has been brought to the attention of local
management in the central sorting office by the claimants.
3.5 At present the acting postal sorters are paid an additional
rate of #2.44 per week for performing the same duties as a
postal sorter whose rate is #12 per week.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4.1 The Company wishes to point out that issues concerning the
pay and conditions of staff may be raised by staff at the
Joint Conciliation Council which is part of a Transitional
Scheme of Conciliation and Arbitration agreed between the
Company and recognised unions. These unions include the
PTWU which represents the workers concerned in this case.
The Company considers that its attendance at the Court
hearing is without prejudice to the Scheme of Conciliation
and Arbitration referred to.
4.2 Postal work is, by its nature, subject to periodic
fluctuations in volume. In order to cope with such
fluctuations, acting lists of staff members who are capable
of carrying on the duties of the next highest grade are
maintained. On occasion, staff may be acting to cover
absences occurring through annual or sick leave or pending an
appointment to a vacant duty or, where appropriate, pending
suppression of the duty.
4.3 An employee acting on a higher duty is not automatically
entitled to promotion to that post, and this is written into
the staff rule books in the Company. It is not, therefore,
correct to compare the pay of the staff in this case with the
pay level which would have been achieved had they all been
promoted in 1985. Where an employee acting on a higher duty
is promoted, however, the promotion takes effect from the
date on which they commenced acting on a continuous basis
against a vacant duty. The staff involved in this case have
not all been acting on a continuous basis since 1985.
4.4 The staff concerned maintain that they have been performing
the duties of postal sorters "for the sum of #2.44 per week
as compared to #12 as an appointed postal sorter". This is
not true. A postman/postwoman acting on postal sorter duties
is paid an acting allowance of #3.71 per week. This is
equivalent to one increment on the postal sorter scale.
4.5 The productivity agreement was negotiated and freely entered
into by the Company on the one hand, and the PTWU on the
other, representing all staff in postal grades (including the
claimants). The agreement provided all staff with a
"national" productivity payment of #10.51 per week in return
for a reduction in costs through suppression of surplus posts
in all grades, including that of postal sorter. In addition,
staff may be paid local productivity payments where time
saved locally results in greater productivity.
4.6 The Company must match the number of staff in each grade with
the amount of work available if it is to make any attempt to
manage the business properly. Central to the concept of the
productivity agreement was the need to rationalise working
arrangements with consequent reductions in posts in all
grades. In the case of the postal sorter grade in the Dublin
area, a total of 42 posts were ceased as part of the
productivity agreement. The Company is bewildered by the
claim that prior to any productivity negotiations 50
vacancies were available on the postal sorter grade. The
number of vacancies varies continually but it has not
exceeded 26 at any time in the last three years. At the time
of the productivity agreement 21 posts were ceased and 21
more were ceased in 1988. It must be stressed that the above
reductions in posts, and similar reductions in other grades,
were made following full agreement, both at national and
local level with the PTWU.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court considers that to the extent that any of the
claimants have a grievance (and the Court takes no view on this
question) it should be resolved through the normal trade union and
industrial relations channels. The Court therefore recommends
that the issues be taken up by the claimants with their trade
union.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
9th December, 1988 John M Horgan
DH/PG Chairman