Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88539 Case Number: LCR12050 Section / Act: S67 Parties: IRISH GUIDE DOGS ASSOCIATION (I.G.D.A.) - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim on behalf of one instructor for a review of salary.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions and arguments from the
parties and taking into account the historical background of the
salary scales applicable to the post, the Court recommends that
the present scale be extended by one point to £12,500 per annum
and that the claimant be placed on the new maximum from the 1st
August, 1988.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Shiel Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88539 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12050
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: IRISH GUIDE DOGS ASSOCIATION (I.G.D.A.)
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
AND
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of one instructor for a review of salary.
BACKGROUND:
2. The claimant is employed as a guide dog instructor and is on
the top point of a six point scale with a salary of £11,686. The
Association reviews the salaries of all staff each October. The
Union contested the nature of the salary review at local level and
at a conciliation conference in March, 1987, sought a salary
increase for the following reasons:-
- an allowance was sought for the training of blind people
in the use of a guide dog (a comparison was drawn with
teachers in special schools for handicapped persons).
- the claimant took a cut in salary from £4,300 to £4,000
on his return from a training course in the UK in 1981.
- the claimant was being asked to train an apprentice
which was part of his job description.
Management rejected these claims but was unwilling to have the
matter referred to the Labour Court until it received a letter
from the Union concerning the specifics of the claim. Following
correspondence and further discussion a second conciliation
conference was held on the 28th June, 1988, at which no progress
was made. In the absence of agreement, the Union sought a full
hearing on a claim for an increase in salary based on:-
(a) restoration of the £300 from 1981, wage-indexed up
to the present with retrospection from October,
1986.
(b) a comparison with similar staff in the U.K.
(c) consideration of shift and overtime element when
calculating salary.
A Court hearing took place in Cork on the 7th September, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. There was no logical reason to reduce the worker's pay
from £4,300 to £4,000 in 1981. It was done, it appears,
without any consultation and only to establish an "Irish
rate."
2. The reduction of £300 at that time represents a loss of
7.5%. The increases which immediately followed would have
applied anyway. Letters received from Management, dated the
26/11/79 and the 3/3/80 show that there was a direct link
between the U.K. rates and the claimant's. The 1979 letter
puts a further commitment on the claimant by requiring him to
return to Ireland and to the Association. This was further
imposed when he was compelled to sign a legal document which
barred him from going abroad following his training.
3. Neither the determination of the claimant's range of
duties nor of his scale were agreed to or constructed by the
Union. There was always a direct link between the U.K. rate
and the claimant's and this should continue to be the case.
He has suffered a serious drift in salary as a result the
Court is requested to at least restore this difference.
4. The present rate in the U.K. is £11,576 (top point of the
scale) which is equivalent to about £13,600 Irish Punts. When
one considers the general level at which U.K. rates are in
relation to Irish rates one could add approximately 20% to
this, giving a figure in excess of £16,000. In addition, U.K.
instructors enjoy other perks including mortgage subsidy which
are not enjoyed by the claimant.
5. The claimant is a mobility instructor whose function it is
to train the visually handicapped to use a guide-dog and to
impart sufficient training and knowledge to enable those
persons to look after the dogs in their own light. Other
duties consist of attending at public events such as guide-dog
demonstrations and fetes and for which payment is made on a
flat-time basis with no overtime and no shift rate paid (full
details of claimant's duties and hours of work supplied to the
Court).
ASSOCIATION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The claimant commenced training as an apprentice in
January, 1980, at Exeter in England. By arrangement with the
British Guide Dogs Association he was to complete all or part
of his training in the U.K. Because of progress in the
I.G.D.A. it was possible to bring him back to Ireland in July,
1981, and in accordance with the terms of his agreement he was
placed on point 2 of the Irish scale. While this meant a
change from the salary level of £4,300 which he was paid in
the U.K. to £4,000 on the Irish scale, the Union assert that
he should have transferred the £300 difference with him,
despite the fact that in January, 1982, under the Irish scale
his salary increased from £4,000 to £5,750.
2. The contract under which the claimant was employed
specifically covered his period of training over a three year
period. As this has been applied by the Association there is
no case whatever for any variation now based on that test.
The Irish scale applied when he returned to Ireland as
specified in his contract. Once he returned to Ireland the
terms of U.K. salary practice had no further relevance.
3. The instructor's position is well remunerated on the
principle of fair comparison in that with a six point scale
leading to a maximum of £11,686 it is better than either the
scale for instructors in the Rehabilitation Institute or
scales operating for instructors in sheltered workshops
(details supplied).
4. Direct comparability with a teacher post is not valid in
that teachers must be graduates of third level institutions.
While apprentice training leading to a post of instructor is
structured and important, nevertheless the academic
requirements of both positions are clearly different. A
teacher can have up to 39 pupils in a class. An instructor in
the I.G.D.A. would rarely for a course of instruction have
more than four people.
5. A teacher has to teach prescribed courses, many for State
examinations, in a class situation everyday for practically
every hour of duty. An instructor in the I.G.D.A. will only
be involved in a class situation during eight weeks of his
working year. It will be clear from this that for the greater
part of the year the instructors are engaged on their main
duties which are training dogs, instructing apprentices when
allocated, and after-care visits to adults who have guide
dogs.