Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92296 Case Number: LCR13737 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: CENTRAL FISHERIES BOARD - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
A dispute concerning a claim for upgrading by a worker.
Recommendation:
The Court having considered all of the circumstances of this case
as outlined by the parties in their oral and written submissions
recommends that the claimant be graded Higher Executive Officer
with effect from 5th July, 1989.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
14th August, 1992 Tom McGrath
A.O.S./M.H. -----------------------------
Deputy Chairman.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Ms. Aoibheann Ni Shuilleabhain.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92296 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13737
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: CENTRAL FISHERIES BOARD
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. A dispute concerning a claim for upgrading by a worker.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker commenced employment with the Board as a Sea
Angling Officer in 1969. In May, 1970 the worker was appointed to
the post of Administrative Officer (A.O.), a position he has since
held.
In 1981 an assessment of the duties and responsibilities of the
A.O. was carried out by the Department of Public Service. The
subsequent report recommended that the post be regraded to Higher
Executive Officer (H.E.O.) level less 10%. This recommendation
was implemented by the Board. As a result of an increase in his
duties and responsibilities, the worker, on the 5th July 1989
lodged a claim with the Board for the upgrading of his post to
Assistant Principal Officer. In June 1990, the Department of
Finance authorised the Institute of Public Administration (I.P.A.)
to carry out a further assessment of the worker's job. The
assessment was carried out in November and a report issued (copy
furnished to the Court). In this report the assessor recommended
that the post of A.O. be graded at the level of Higher Executive
Officer. The Board failed to implement the recommendation.
The issue was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Relations Commission on 23rd January, 1992. A conciliation
conference was held on 28th February, 1992 at which agreement was
not reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 6th
April, 1992 under Section 26(1) Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
The Court investigated the dispute on 30th June, 1992 - the
earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS
3. 1. The duties and responsibilities of the worker have
greatly increased since the assessment was carried out by the
Department of Public Service in 1981. The Union feels that
these factors were undervalued in the I.P.A. report and seeks
the upgrading of the post to Assistant Principal Officer
level.
2. The Department of Finance agreed to and approved the
examination carried out by the I.P.A. However, it is now
refusing to recognise the report of its own chosen examiner.
3. The post of Sea Angling Officer, from which the worker
was originally promoted, now enjoys a higher salary level
than that of Administrative Officer. Such an anomaly is
totally unacceptable.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The recommendation of the I.P.A. assessor was passed to
the Department of Marine but rejected on the grounds that it
was felt that it did not sufficiently justify the upgrading
of the post of A.O. to HEO.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court having considered all of the circumstances of this case
as outlined by the parties in their oral and written submissions
recommends that the claimant be graded Higher Executive Officer
with effect from 5th July, 1989.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
14th August, 1992 Tom McGrath
A.O.S./M.H. -----------------------------
Deputy Chairman.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Ms. Aoibheann Ni Shuilleabhain.