AD8832

Subject:
Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. CW/135/88 concerning the Council's decision to limit the recruitment of water inspectors to those who are presently works foremen.

Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions of the parties to the appeal
the Court considers that the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation
be amended as follows:-

That in the current economic circumstances confronting the County
Council the Union accept the Council's proposals in relation to
the present three Water Inspector positions.

Thereafter the County Council revert to the accepted custom and
practice of filling vacancies as operated heretofore.

Division: Ms Owens Mr Shiel Mr Walsh

Text of Document__________________________________________________________________

CD88353 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD3288


INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 13(9)

PARTIES: DUBLIN COUNTY COUNCIL

AND

ELECTRICAL, ELECTRONIC, TELECOMMUNICATION
AND PLUMBING UNION


SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation No. CW/135/88 concerning the Council's decision to
limit the recruitment of water inspectors to those who are
presently works foremen.


BACKGROUND:
2. Because of severe financial cutbacks in Government funding the
County Council has had to curtail services, re-deploy staff and
implement the Governments Scheme for Voluntary Redundancy/Early
Retirement. Under the terms of the Scheme the Council is
precluded from appointing new staff and is obliged to fill
vacancies from existing staff. As the Council has foremen and
assistant foremen who are surplus to requirements it seeks to fill
three water inspector vacancies from these grades. The Union
objects to this procedure and claims that all its members
including plumbers, assistant foremen, and foremen, should be
eligible to apply. The parties failed to agree at local level
negotiations and the matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner
for investigation and recommendation. On the 4th May, 1988 the
Rights Commissioner issued his recommendation as follows:-

" I recommend that the Union accepts the County Council
proposals on the method of recruitment for the vacant
Water Inspector positions. "


On the 9th May, 1988 the Union appealed the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation to the Labour Court under Section 13(9) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place
on the 9th June, 1988.


UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Council's method of filling the vacancies is
completely at variance with long standing custom and practice.
The Council intend to fill these vacancies from a group of
people referred to here as works foremen. The works foremen
according to the Council are superfluous to the Council's
existing needs for people of that category. This condition
arose as a result of the Council reducing it's involvement in
direct labour schemes. The works foremen do not necessarily
come from one category of County Council employees. Members
of this Union have been works foremen. The Union is not
trying to exclude works foremen from applying for the position
of water inspector. It may well be when all the positions are
filled that they will be filled by people who are presently
works foremen, and since the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation we have now established that all of the
positions will be filled by members of this Union who are
presently employed as foremen.

2. In the past, the manner of filling the positions of water
inspector was by public advertisement. The positions weren't
limited to any particular category of person with any
particular qualification, in fact, the position of water
inspector was rather unique in that respect, while the Union
would claim that plumbers were best qualified by the nature
and background of their work to fill the positions, the
Council didn't necessarily agree with that idea. While the
Union has never examined the background of the people employed
in Dublin County Council as water inspectors, it believes that
the biggest vocational grouping would be that of plumber.

3. This Union is not insisting on the strict observance of
past procedures in relation to the filling of the existing
vacancies, as this would entail advertisement in the local
press, and apart from the expense involved, it would result in
thousands of applications which would have to be processed by
Council staff in a time consuming operation. The Union states
this without prejudice to the filling of future vacancies, and
with the knowledge that the people best qualified to fill
these positions are presently employed by Dublin County
Council. The Union is being perfectly reasonable and the
Council is being unreasonable in as much as it is denying the
rights of plumbers presently employed in Dublin County
Council, to apply for the position of water inspector. A
right that was always there in the past and not just for
plumbers employed by the Council, but by plumbers nationally.


4. The Union claims that its members i.e. plumbers, as well
as its other members assistant foremen and foremen be given
the same opportunity to apply for the vacant positions. In
insisting on that right, it is not seeking to exclude any
other category of Dublin County Council employee from applying
for the positions or of availing of the same opportunity as
plumbers.


COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Due to the severe financial cutbacks experienced by the
Council in the past few years services have had to be
curtailed and staff re-deployed from new work schemes to
maintenance works.


2. In October, 1987, the Government's Scheme for Voluntary
Redundancy/Early Retirement was advertised to all staff in the
Council and to date approximately 360 staff have availed of
the Scheme. A number of water and sewer inspectors applied
for the Scheme, and though not surplus to requirement, they
were allowed to leave as the Council still had a number of
surplus foremen/assistant foremen whom it was proposed would
fill the inspector posts which were vacated.


3. Despite the numbers that have availed of the Scheme the
Council still have foremen/assistant foremen for whom it has
no work and in these circumstances it is imperative that the
Council be allowed to re-deploy its surplus foremen/assistant
foremen to the vacant water and sewer inspector posts.



DECISION:

5. Having considered the submissions of the parties to the appeal
the Court considers that the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation
be amended as follows:-

That in the current economic circumstances confronting the County
Council the Union accept the Council's proposals in relation to
the present three Water Inspector positions.

Thereafter the County Council revert to the accepted custom and
practice of filling vacancies as operated heretofore.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.


Evelyn Owens
___________________
20th June, 1988.
T. O'D. / M. F. Deputy Chairman.