Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89335 Case Number: LCR12542 Section / Act: S67 Parties: DUNDALK URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL - and - LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICES UNION |
Claim by the Union for an assessment of work done by Water Inspectors.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the evidence submitted to it the Court does
not find sufficient grounds on which it could recommend concession
of the Union's claim.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Collins Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89335 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12542
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: DUNDALK URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL
and
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICES UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union for an assessment of work done by Water
Inspectors.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Council employs two Water Inspectors. They are involved
in the inspection and maintenance of the water supply, under the
direction of the Town Engineer. In 1980, the Union sought to have
them related to the craft structure for pay purposes and it sought
the application of the chargehand rate for the two workers. The
Labour Court in Recommendation No. 5885 dated 25th July, 1980
recommended:-
"The Court does not find, in the light of the terms of the
1979 National Understanding, that a case has been
established for the granting of the Union's claim".
The Union again referred the claim to the Labour Court in 1981.
The Court appointed an assessor from the Irish Productivity Centre
and following receipt of a report recommended, in Recommendation
No. 6592 dated 10th September, 1981 as follows:-
"Having regard to the report of the assessor, the Court
considers that the duties of water inspectors require that
the job holders be qualified plumbers, though not
necessarily charge hands.
The Court therefore recommends that inspectors should be
paid the maximum of the craftsmens' scale with effect from
1st April, 1981".
In 1988, the Union requested that a further job evaluation on the
duties of Water Inspectors be carried out jointly by the Council
and Union. The Union would also agree to the Council undertaking
an independent assessment as the work and responsibility of Water
Inspectors had changed since the 1981 review. The Council did not
agree to the job evaluation and claimed that the duties of Water
Inspectors had not changed since the issue of Labour Court
Recommendation 6592. The claim was referred to the Conciliation
Service of the Labour Court and a conciliation conference took
place on 9th May, 1989. No agreement was reached and the Union
requested a full Court hearing. The Council agreed and the Court
investigated the dispute in Dundalk on 16th August, 1989 (the
earliest date suitable to all parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The work of Water Inspectors has become more
responsible, complex and difficult since it was evaluated in
1981. There has been an increase in the number of residential
dwellings and industrial complexes in Dundalk. The
application of water charges and other issues has changed the
role of the two workers.
2. Changes have taken place in other Authorities since
1981. Water Inspectors in Dublin Corporation were graded at
grade III. Following an evaluation and negotiations they are
now graded at grade V level. There are also changes in Dublin
County Council.
3. The Union is aware that Water Inspectors in other Local
Authorities are paid at the same rate and even less than those
in Dundalk. However as there is no national grade, the Union
does not accept that because some Inspectors are paid at a
lower rate that it makes the grade in Dundalk the appropriate
one.
4. Should an evaluation based on fair measurement recommend
that the status quo be maintained, the Union is prepared to
accept the outcome.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In view of the assessment conducted by the Irish
Productivity Centre on behalf of the Labour Court in 1981, it
cannot be accepted that a further assessment is warranted,
particularly as the duties and responsibilities of the two
workers have not changed to any degree in the meantime.
2. Water inspection duties are performed in a number of
different ways and by different personnel throughout Local
Authorities. In some instances the duties are performed by
waterworks caretakers while in other areas such duties are
performed by plumbers. The rate of pay varies where Water
Inspectors are employed but they are generally paid at the
craftsmens' rate or lower.
4. 3. The Craftsmens' Agreement concluded between the Local
Authority Craft Union and the Local Government Staff
Negotiations Board, set out definitions for Craftsmen
Supervisors (details supplied). It is clear that the role of
Water Inspectors would not comply with the criteria agreed.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the evidence submitted to it the Court does
not find sufficient grounds on which it could recommend concession
of the Union's claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
4th September, 1989 ----------------
A.McG/U.S. Chairman