Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90343 Case Number: LCR13000 Section / Act: S67 Parties: TRINITY HOUSE SCHOOL - and - LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICES UNION |
Claim seeking the payment of an allowance of #8 per shift to child care staff who act as co-ordinator for a shift in Trinity House School, Lusk.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered the views of the parties, both
oral and written recommends that an allowance of #4 per shift be
paid to those employees who act as "co-ordinators".
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90343 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13000
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: TRINITY HOUSE SCHOOL
(REPRESENTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION)
AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICES UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim seeking the payment of an allowance of #8 per shift to
child care staff who act as co-ordinator for a shift in Trinity
House School, Lusk.
BACKGROUND:
2. Trinity House, Lusk was opened in 1983. It was established
under the Childrens Acts and has accommodation for up to 30 boys.
There are three house-units in the school each of which
accommodates ten boys. Apart from school hours, each unit
operates independently of the other two. Four care staff per
shift are generally assigned to House 1 and three each to Houses 2
and 3. A team leader is also assigned to each of the three units.
A team leader is a care staff member who is paid an allowance of
#922 per annum (details of duties supplied to the Court). The
exigencies of the service require that a staff member must act as
co-ordinator to each shift (details of duties/responsibilities
supplied to the Court). In general, a team leader, when on duty,
acts as co-ordinator to a shift but in his or her absence the
duties are assigned to a care staff member. The Union claims that
the co-ordinator is responsible for the shift when the team leader
is not on duty and lodged a claim for an allowance of #8 per
shift. Following consideration of the claim Management responded
by offering #2 per shift. This was rejected and the matter was
referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. At a
conciliation conference on the 24th May, Management improved its
offer to #2.25 per shift. However this did not settle the matter
and the dispute was referred to the Labour Court for investigation
and recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the 19th July,
1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The co-ordinator is responsible for the shift when the
team leader is not on duty and carries out the same functions
as the team leader for the shifts. Only experienced staff
with satisfactory service are nominated to act as
co-ordinator.
2. Management state that a child care staff member should
never be able to accumulate more per year in the form of a
co-ordinator's allowance than the allowance which is currently
paid to the team leaders. The Union does not accept that this
point is relevant as a care staff member would have to be a
co-ordinator on an almost ongoing basis to accumulate such an
amount and, if that is the case then surely they build up a
significant entitlement. In addition, the allowance for team
leader was arrived at as a percentage of the responsibility
allowance applied to teachers and not on the basis of shifts.
3. Because of the mobility of staff out of Trinity House it
is quite normal that the co-ordinator is the only permanent
probated member of staff on the shift. This adds
significantly to the responsibility of the co-ordinator.
Should an incident or an outbreak of violence or accident
occur on the shift, the responsibility lies with the
co-ordinator and in an organisation like Trinity House, such
incidents could have very serious consequences, both on boys
and staff. The co-ordinator bears a heavy burden of
responsibility in all areas of child care but also in
monitoring a high level of safety for both staff and boys.
4. The offer made by Management is totally inadequate, taking
into account the responsibility involved in the job. The
Court is asked to recognise that in all of the circumstances,
and in particular, because of the type of organisation
involved and the duties allocated to the job, #8.00 per shift
is reasonable and to recommend in favour of the Union's claim.
DEPARTMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Management is prepared to concede that there is some merit
in this claim and to this effect has made an offer of #2.25
per shift. However, it is considered that the Union claim of
#8 per shift is totally unrealistic given that the team
leaders receive approximately #3.53 per shift for performing
additional and more onerous duties than those of the care
staff member. There are substantial differences between the
roles of team leader and shift co-ordinator. The basic role
of the co-ordinator is maintaining the status quo and the
establishment and attainment of short-term goals i.e. goals
that can be set and achieved within the time period of one
shift. It therefore can be reckoned as a reactive role.
4. 2. The team leader's role, in addition to the above, involves
much more proactive activity and forward planning. As well as
formulating and implementing policy the main emphasis is on
the setting and achieving of medium and long-term goals. In
brief, any process which takes place within the period of one
shift can be the responsibility of either a co-ordinator or a
team leader. Any process that takes place beyond the period
of one shift can only be the responsibility of a team leader.
3. Concession of this claim would have a costly repercussive
effect in other special schools as a result of the elimination
of the existing pay relationship between care staff and team
leaders. As a team leader post is deemed a promotional outlet
for care staff workers the concession of this claim would
facilitate a substantial claim from that grade in order to
maintain the present pay differential. Likewise there would
be a follow-on claim from grades above this level i.e. Head of
Care & Deputy Director.
4. Should the Court recommend in favour of the Union, its
attention is drawn to the Public Service Pay Agreement under
the terms of which any settlement would fall to be
implemented.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered the views of the parties, both
oral and written recommends that an allowance of #4 per shift be
paid to those employees who act as "co-ordinators".
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court,
Tom McGrath
___________________
7th September, 1990.
D. H. / M. F. Deputy Chairman.