Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92518 Case Number: LCR13887 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE GALWAY - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
A dispute concerning a claim for the pro-rata treatment of temporary teaching appointees with regard to contracts, pay and conditions.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions
of the parties.
Basically the Union's case relies on the general principle that
part-time and temporary staff should be treated not less
favourably than full-time, permanent staff - apart from the
obvious limitations that derive from the nature of their
employment.
The College's contention, on the other hand, is that a fundamental
feature of the claimants' employment is that their services, which
are limited to the teaching area, are not required for longer than
the 10-month period of their contract. The College make a strong
distinction between the claimants and the members of the Junior
Lecturer (JL) grade insofar as the research responsibilities of
the Junior Lecturer JL grade are concerned.
Having considered the arguments the Court accepts that there is a
distinction between College requirements of Temporary Teaching
Appointees and its requirements of Junior Lecturer. However, the
Court is of the view that the distinction blurs with time. In
these circumstances the Court does not recommend the concession of
the claim for longer-term contracts except in cases where a
Temporary Teaching Appointee's appointment is renewed beyond the
second year, in which case the Court recommends that the renewed
appointment be effected on a 12-months basis. The Court
recommends likewise, that in any case in which a Temporary
Teaching Appointee's appointment is renewed beyond a 2nd year,
payment should be made on the basis of the Junior Lectuer scale
commencing at the 3rd point of the scale.
The Court recommends that the Union should accept the offer made
by the College in respect of the payment of travel grants to
Temporary Teaching Appointees.
The Court notes the College's concession of the claims in respect
of:-
(1) the application of the effective dates of National Pay
Agreements and
(2) the grant of incremental credit on appointment to
full-time posts.
The Court does not recommend any change in the existing procedures
for the appointments of Temporary Teaching Appointees.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr Brennan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92518 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13887
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE GALWAY
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. A dispute concerning a claim for the pro-rata treatment of
temporary teaching appointees with regard to contracts, pay and
conditions.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The temporary teaching appointments were originally
created (since 1983) as a stop-gap measure to provide cover
for permanent posts which could not, for various budgetary
and/or technical reasons, be filled immediately. At present,
these account for half of the temporary teacher appointments.
Some other posts of that nature were created to enable the
University offer certain new postgraduate programmes in the
context of external short-term funding e.g. the European
Social Fund. The College has not been able to establish these
posts on the normal permanent basis due to the contingent
nature of the funding from year to year.
2. The Union commenced negotiations with the College in
1990 on contracts, pay and conditions for these workers. The
issue was not resolved through local discussions and it was
referred to the Labour Relations Commission Conciliation
conferences took place on this and other issues on the 3rd
December, 1991, 25th February, 1992, 28th April, 1992 and 16th
July, 1992. Agreement could not be reached between the
parties and the issue was referred to the Labour Court on the
6th August, 1992. The Court investigated the matter on the
30th October, 1992 in Galway.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Temporary teaching appointees are employed by the
College regardless of the funding service.
2. The range of duties which they carry out are common to
their group and to other academic staff within the College, in
particular the junior lecturer grade.
3. Where a common employer engages a group of people to
carry out tasks and there is no significant or substantial
difference between these tasks, a common remuneration package
should be established.
4. The tasks carried out by the temporary teacher
appointees include:
- Teaching of undergraduate and post graduate courses
to masters level.
- Supervision of theses as at above levels.
- Course design and preparation: reading, study,
research and travel options.
- Setting and marking of exams.
- Marking of essays and assignments.
- Advising students on a range of relevant matters.
- Participating in the running and development of the
particular department through faculty membership.
- Officially representing the College at external and
internal functions and the national fora of the
various Professions in addition to the media.
- Research.
The College's argument that they were essentially involved in
teaching only is at odds with the facts.
5. The College has attempted to describe the temporary
teacher appointment post as short term. One person is
entering her 4th successive contract. The posts have
continued to exist for a long number of years. The posts are
not short term.
6. The College's concern about a cut-price lecturer grade,
is not properly addressed by disguising permanent positions as
short term posts.
7. The rights of part-time and/or long term contract
workers are being recognised by employers and by the
institutions of the State, including the Labour Court. This
case does not set a precedent.
8. The current employment system (10 month contracts) being
used by the College means that the majority of these
appointees must register as unemployed during the summer
months, even though their supervisory role vis a vis students
may continue during this period.
10. The College recognises and takes full advantage of the
quality of the appointees by including their names in the
College calender and their achievements are highlighted in the
College President's reports.
COLLEGES ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The temporary teaching appointments are specifically
designed to meet particular short-term teching needs and
longer-term contracts are not appropriate.
2. Concession of the claim would erode the clear
distinctions between temporary teaching appointments and the
normal grade structure, and would lead to their insertion as a
new recruitment grade beneath that structure, with consequent
deleterious effects on the career structure.
3. The College is concerned at the potential cost of
concession of the claim, particularly because of the pay
commitments already facing it in 1992-3.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions
of the parties.
Basically the Union's case relies on the general principle that
part-time and temporary staff should be treated not less
favourably than full-time, permanent staff - apart from the
obvious limitations that derive from the nature of their
employment.
The College's contention, on the other hand, is that a fundamental
feature of the claimants' employment is that their services, which
are limited to the teaching area, are not required for longer than
the 10-month period of their contract. The College make a strong
distinction between the claimants and the members of the Junior
Lecturer (JL) grade insofar as the research responsibilities of
the Junior Lecturer JL grade are concerned.
Having considered the arguments the Court accepts that there is a
distinction between College requirements of Temporary Teaching
Appointees and its requirements of Junior Lecturer. However, the
Court is of the view that the distinction blurs with time. In
these circumstances the Court does not recommend the concession of
the claim for longer-term contracts except in cases where a
Temporary Teaching Appointee's appointment is renewed beyond the
second year, in which case the Court recommends that the renewed
appointment be effected on a 12-months basis. The Court
recommends likewise, that in any case in which a Temporary
Teaching Appointee's appointment is renewed beyond a 2nd year,
payment should be made on the basis of the Junior Lectuer scale
commencing at the 3rd point of the scale.
The Court recommends that the Union should accept the offer made
by the College in respect of the payment of travel grants to
Temporary Teaching Appointees.
The Court notes the College's concession of the claims in respect
of:-
(1) the application of the effective dates of National Pay
Agreements and
(2) the grant of incremental credit on appointment to
full-time posts.
The Court does not recommend any change in the existing procedures
for the appointments of Temporary Teaching Appointees.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
2nd December, 1992 ----------------
P. O'C/U.S. Chairman
NOTE:
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.