Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90107 Case Number: LCR12835 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CITY OF DUBLIN VOCATIONAL EDUCATION COMMITTEE - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE |
Dispute concerning Christmas leave for technicians .
Recommendation:
7. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties recommends that the V.E.C. revert to the long standing
arrangements for concessionary Christmas leave available to the
technicians prior to 1988.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Brennan Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90107 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12835
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: CITY OF DUBLIN VOCATIONAL EDUCATION COMMITTEE
and
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning Christmas leave for technicians .
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1977 the Union served a claim on behalf of technicians for
five days extra annual leave and specific leave at Christmas and
Easter corresponding to that applying in University College Dublin
(U.C.D.). Following discussions, the Staff Relations Committee of
the V.E.C. at its meeting on 7th October, 1977 recommended that
annual leave for technicians on or above point 06 of the scale be
increased from fifteen to eighteen days. Sanction for this was
formally obtained from the Department of the Public Service in
October, 1979. In addition to annual leave, the workers also
receive concessionary leave at Christmas and Easter and there is a
dispute concerning the number of days leave at Christmas. The
Union claims that there is parity between technicians in the
Vocational Education Committee (V.E.C.) and those in U.C.D. and
that following the implementation of the increased annual leave in
1978, the position was as follows:-
U.C.D. V.E.C.
Annual Leave 15 18
Christmas 4 4
Easter 4 1.50
3. However the V.E.C.'s position is that the Staff Relations
Committee specifically stated that existing arrangements would
apply at Christmas and Easter and these were two and one and a
half days respectively. Further, that parity with U.C.D. has
never existed, that the only relationship is with the general
operative grades in Dublin Corporation and that the leave
arrangements following the 1978 increase were as follows:
U.C.D. V.E.C.
Annual Leave 15 18
Christmas 4 2
Easter 3 1.50
(Annual leave in U.C.D. has since increased).
4. On 8th January, 1990 the matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference was held on 6th February, 1990 at which no progress was
made and on 15th February, 1990 the matter was referred to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. The Court
investigated the dispute on 12th March, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. At a meeting held in March, 1978 it was confirmed that not
only would the three additional days be paid but that the
concessionary days operating in the V.E.C. were comparative
with those operating in U.C.D. (details supplied to the
Court). In 1978 and 1979 four days holidays were applied at
Christmas and in 1980, five days were applied due to the day
on which Christmas day fell. Four days holidays continued to
apply up until a few years ago, when attempts were made to
cut back to three days. After a threatened dispute the
College applied the four days, accepting its mistake. The
following year the College again argued that only three days
were due. After considerable discussion and delay the College
eventually agreed that four days would apply at Christmas in
most cases depending on which day Christmas day fell, but that
on other occasions when only three days were necessary then
three days were applied. The Union refused to accept this as
it was reneging on a previous long-standing arrangement which
was formalised in 1978. There is overwhelming evidence that
there is an already established agreement of four concession
days at Christmas.
COMMITTEE'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The offer in 1977 of the three extra days annual leave was
in response to a specific claim and did not concede parity,
nor special leave arrangements at Christmas other than what
obtained at the time of the offer (details supplied to the
Court). At no stage was parity with U.C.D. for purposes of
holiday arrangements conceded by the V.E.C. and this parity
has never existed in practice. In 1981, the Union made a
claim for an additional three days concessionary leave on the
basis that their annual leave arrangements should be brought
into line with U.C.D. and indicated that they assumed that
there was an arrangement for four working days at Christmas
and that the workers had parity with U.C.D. technicians.
However, in August, 1981 the Committee wrote to the Union
rejecting the claim and pointing out that the technicians had
an established relationship for annual leave purposes with
general operative grades in Dublin Corporation (details
supplied to the Court). The Union did not respond to this
letter and to the Committee's knowledge has not contested this
relationship.
2. All non-teaching staff receive a minimum of three days
concessionary leave which are considered by the V.E.C. to be
concessionary days. Occasionally it happens depending on the
day on which Christmas falls, that all non-teaching staff
receive a fourth and on a rare occasion a fifth concessionary
day (details supplied to the Court). The circular letters
detailing the Christmas leave arrangements have always
referred to the concessionary nature of the leave and are
addressed to all non-academic staff. To date, all of the
non-teaching Unions, with the exception of this one, have
accepted the concessionary nature of the leave and have never
contested whether their members received three or four days at
Christmas. To establish now, as a matter of right, four days
annual leave at Christmas for technicians would have major
internal repercussive effects for the V.E.C. and would also
form the basis of a similar claim in respect of Regional
Technical Colleges whose Christmas arrangements are similarly
based.
3. The Union has implied in discussions that technicians in
U.C.D. have four days annual leave at Christmas in addition to
their normal annual leave entitlement. However, the V.E.C.'s
understanding is that such days as are conceded at Christmas
are regarded by the College as concessionary days and do not
form an entitlement as such and can be withdrawn by the
employer. The matter of parity for the purpose of annual
leave between technicians employed in U.C.D. and technicians
employed in this V.E.C. would have a fundamental bearing on
the nature and structure of this V.E.C.'s programmes, as
technical support staff serve a very important role in
providing support to the teaching and ancillary functions of
the Committee. If parity exists it should be clearly seen to
exist. If it is not clearly seen to exist, as in the case
here, the claim in its present format should be rejected.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties recommends that the V.E.C. revert to the long standing
arrangements for concessionary Christmas leave available to the
technicians prior to 1988.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_________________________
9th May, 1990. Deputy Chairman
U.M./J.C.