Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90213 Case Number: LCR12901 Section / Act: S67 Parties: TRALEE URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (U.D.C.) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim by the Union for an increase in supervisory allowance for a worker.
Recommendation:
5. The Court having considered the submissions of the parties
does not recommend concession of the claim.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90213 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12901
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: TRALEE URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (U.D.C.)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union for an increase in supervisory allowance
for a worker.
BACKGROUND:
2. There are three national differential rates applicable to the
foreman craftsman grade (i.e. 7.50%, 12.50% and 20%). The worker
concerned who is employed as an environmental supervisor is paid
at the assistant foreman craftsman rate which is equal to the
craftsman's rate plus 12.50%. There are three other supervisors
(i.e. roads, housing, and water supply inspector) who report to
the town foreman. The town foreman and housing supervisor receive
the 20% supervisory allowance whereas the other supervisors,
including the worker, are paid the lower 12.50% rate. The housing
supervisor has traditionally been appointed as a foreman craftsman
with direct responsibility for the supervision of craftsmen and
Tralee U.D.C. claims that is the reason for paying him the 20%
allowance. The Union claims that the supervisory duties and
responsibilities of the worker concerned are comparable to that of
the housing supervisor and that the worker should therefore
receive the higher supervisory allowance of 20%. Tralee U.D.C.
rejected the claim. No agreement was reached at local level and
the matter was referred on 23rd October, 1989 to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court. A conciliation conference was held
on 17th January, 1990 at which no agreement was reached. The
matter was referred on 25th April, 1990 to a full hearing of the
Labour Court which was held in Tralee on 16th May, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The duties and responsibilities of the worker as
environmental supervisor have expanded over the years. These
duties include the supervision of 25 workers including
craftsmen. The worker's supervisory duties are no less
onerous than those of the housing supervisor and he should
therefore get the same supervisory allowance of 20%.
2. The housing supervisor supervises 9 workers and has a
budget of approximately #240,000. The worker concerned
supervises a higher number of workers (25) and has
responsibility for a budget of nearly #1m. The worker also
has a much broader range of disciplines to cope with.
3. There is a national scale for craftsman supervisory
allowances. However the conditions under which those
allowances are paid vary considerably from employer to
employer. Local factors and activities determine the level of
allowance paid to supervisors. In this case the supervisory
responsibilities of the worker warrants payment of the 20%
allowance.
TRALEE U.D.C. ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The rate applicable to the worker is reasonable having
regard to the duties and responsibilities of the job and the
wage rates applicable to other employees of Tralee U.D.C. The
rate paid to the environmental supervisor is the same as that
paid to assistant foreman or assistant supervisor employed by
other similar local authorities (details supplied to the
Court). Acceptance of the Union's claim could have
repercussive affects in other local authorities.
2. Acceptance of the claim would also result in the
environmental supervisor having the same rate of pay as the
town foreman and a higher rate of pay than the roads and the
water supply supervisors. This situation could result in
claims for regrading in respect of the other supervisory
positions.
3. The Union's claim is contrary to government policy in
relation to pay restraint. The appropriate rates for
craftsmen were agreed nationally.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court having considered the submissions of the parties
does not recommend concession of the claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
_______________________
7th June, 1990. Deputy Chairman
A.S./J.C.