Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90131 Case Number: LCR12882 Section / Act: S67 Parties: UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE |
Claim by the Union for upgrading of three workers in the reprographics department of the University.
Recommendation:
5. In view of the terms of Clause 3.5 of the Elaboration of
Clause 3 of the Agreement on Pay in the Public Service as agreed
between the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the Minister for
Finance which was cited by the University as applying to this
claim, the Court is precluded from making any recommendation on
this cost increasing claim.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90131 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12882
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK
and
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union for upgrading of three workers in the
reprographics department of the University.
BACKGROUND:
2. The reprographics department was established in 1973 and is,
inter alia, responsible for printing and photocopying for the
students and staff. The department is currently under the
management of an administrative assistant and since 1980 has been
staffed by two print operatives and one porter/attendant. The two
operatives are graded at secretarial 2 level (#8528 - 10,772 p.a.
as of 1st January, 1990) and the porter/attendant is paid the
standard porters' rate of pay (#8897 - #9454 as of January, 1990).
The Union claims that the work of the department has become more
demanding in terms of skill and responsibility over the years and
that the three workers should be upgraded to comparable scales
paid by other third level colleges (details supplied to the
Court). The University rejected the claim for upgrading and the
matter was referred on 11th January, 1990 to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court. A conciliation conference was held
on 6th February, 1990 at which no agreement was reached and the
matter was referred on 26th February, 1990 to a full hearing of
the Labour Court which was held in Limerick on 8th May, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Since 1977 the work of the department has expanded to a
phenomenal degree with new machinery being introduced
resulting in added skills and responsibilities for the three
workers. All paper used in the University is purchased by the
print operators, all exam papers are printed by this
department, lecture notes are sold and there is a consequent
cash intake which puts a high level of responsibility on the
three workers. Given this expansion in work and added
responsibility the three workers should be upgraded.
2. The work of the reprographics department has become
specialised over the years. The present scales and rates of
the three workers do not reflect this change. The gradings
and salary structures for work in comparable third level
institutions are much better. The duties of the three workers
can be favourably compared with the duties of workers in
comparable facilities at University College Dublin (U.C.D.) or
Athlone and Galway Regional Technical Colleges (R.T.C.). The
two print operatives should be placed on the appropriate point
of the comparable craft assistant scale and the
porter/attendant should be placed on the comparable copying
office operator scale I.
UNIVERSITY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The current grading and salary structure in operation in
the department concerned is satisfactory and the University
sees no reason to change it. It is true that productivity has
increased significantly since 1980. The primary reason for
increased productivity is the constant updating and expansion
of equipment. It would not see this as grounds for an
increase in salary or upgrading for the three workers.
2. The print operatives and the porter/attendant have
received a range of increases in line with the special pay
awards granted in the public service (details supplied to the
Court). The rates of pay currently paid by the University are
in line with other rates of pay paid by the other universities
for grades of staff performing similar duties.
3. The University is strongly opposed to these claims and
considers that there is no merit in them. Without prejudice
to this position because of the increases currently being
applied to the workers concerned the present claim falls
within the terms of Clause 3.5 of the elaboration of the
Agreement of Pay in the Public Service. Under this clause the
agreed position is that claims such as the present one made by
the Union may not be processed to finality until after 31st
March, 1991. After that date claims may be processed to
finality in relation to amount but not in relation to
implementation dates.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. In view of the terms of Clause 3.5 of the Elaboration of
Clause 3 of the Agreement on Pay in the Public Service as agreed
between the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the Minister for
Finance which was cited by the University as applying to this
claim, the Court is precluded from making any recommendation on
this cost increasing claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
__________________________
30th May, 1990. Deputy Chairman
A.S./J.C.