Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91651 Case Number: LCR13561 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: RADIO TELEFIS EIREANN - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION;ELECTRICAL TRADES UNION;NATIONAL UNION OF JOURNALISTS |
Dispute concerning various issues.
Recommendation:
The full recommendation of the document is not available on the
add field.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Keogh Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91651 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13561
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: RADIO TELEFIS EIREANN
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
ELECTRICAL TRADES UNION
NATIONAL UNION OF JOURNALISTS
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning various issues.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Court investigated the dispute at hearings which were held
in January and February, 1992. The following is the Court's
recommendation.
*RECOMMENDATION:
3. After direct discussions with the parties the Court recommends
the following terms as the basis for settling the present dispute.
(A) ENG/EFP Camera Crewing.
In the first instance to deal with the question of ENG/EFP
Camera Crewing.
(a) The terms of Labour Court Recommendation No. 13467 will
be implemented subject to the following modifications.
(a) The lump sum for qualifying staff as recommended
will be amended to provide a sum of £1,750 with an
initial amount of £550 plus four annual payments of
£300. These payments may be subsumed by possible
future changes in the rate.
(b) The number of upgradings recommended to be
increased to six.
(c) It is understood and recognised by the parties that
further technological change, beyond that provided
for in L.C.R. 13467 will arise in the area of
ENG/EFP crewing which will require to be taken into
account when establishing the final grading
structure for S.A.L. operations.
(d) It is agreed that when Grade B S.A.L. operators
operate or function as camera persons they will be
paid the appropriate substitution allowance for the
higher grade.
(e) The Assistant Camera Operator grade is covered by
and eligible for the benefit of the above terms.
It appears that further direct discussions about
their position may be necessary and the Court
recommends that these take place without delay.
(f) Finally any matters arising out of the
implementation of the new crewing arrangements, or
further changes which may arise in the immediate
future will clearly fall to be dealt with by the
Special Adjudication Committee (See below) in the
event that normal procedures of direct discussion
fail to reach agreement.
(B) Self Editing
It is the opinion of the Court that in the first instance the
Company and the Sound Operators should meet directly at the
earliest opportunity if only to clarify their respective
positions prior to referring the matter at issue to the
Special Adjudication Committee. The Court therefore so
recommends, and further specifically recommends that the lump
sum recommended in L.C.R. 13280 be increased to £1,800.
Subsequent differences which may arise with other groups in
the event of the eventual extension of the work in question
should in the first instance be negotiated using the normal
existing machinery but in the event of failure to agree will
fall to be dealt with by the Special Adjudication Committee.
(C) N.U.J.
It is noted by the Court that both R.T.E. and N.U.J. agree to
begin immediate discussions on those items at issue between
them in respect of the management structure of the Newsroom
Division in R.T.E.
In the event of failure to reach agreement the Court
recommends that the issue be dealt with by means of the
normal machinery open to the parties under the Industrial
Relations Acts.
(D) General Industrial Relations
The Court notes the commitment of both parties to improving
Industrial Relations at every level. The Court therefore
recommends that a joint review of current Employee Relations
and Management/Trade Union consultative procedures within the
organisation, should begin without delay. The task should be
undertaken at highest possible levels of Management and Union
representation with the specific purpose of evaluating and
recommending possible improvements and alternative
approaches. Those involved may seek whatever outside
assistance they agree to be appropriate to the task in hand.
The Court would expect such a review to be completed not
later than mid November next and whatever changes it provides
for to be implemented by 1st January, 1993.
(E) Special Adjudication Committee
Pending the outcome of the above review the Court recommends
the establishment of a Special Adjudication Committee. This
Committee would have the specific and limited purpose of
dealing with issues arising from technological change and
changes in work practices and their consequences, including
remuneration/compensation where appropriate.
The Committee would consist of equal numbers of
representatives from Management and Unions with an
independent Chairperson agreed by the parties. Ideally
numbers should be limited to two persons from either side.
The Committee will be free to determine its own rules and
also free to decide if an issue is properly before it. It
may seek to secure agreement between the parties. At the
request of either party the Committee may issue an
adjudication on the subject in dispute.
Should either party find the adjudication unsatisfactory it
will be implemented on the basis that the Committee will
review the case after it has been in operation for six
months.
In its adjudication on any issue the Committee will have full
regard to the terms of any relevant agreements and practices
in force in R.T.E.
The Committee will be established by the parties as soon as
may be after commencement of work and will cease to accept
cases with effect from 1st January, 1993 its sole function
thereafter being to review any cases which may require to be
dealt with under the procedure set out above.
It is to be stressed that the Special Adjudication Committee
is in addition to and not a substitute for the normal
internal negotiating machinery currently in place within the
organisation.
Having regard to the above it is the confident hope of the
Court that following the overall review the parties will be
fully agreed on any future machinery to replace the Special
Adjudication Committee.
(F) Relations on Resumption of Work
This Recommendation is made on the general understanding by
all the parties involved that no group or individual within
the organisation shall be penalised or otherwise
disadvantaged as a result of any actions taken or failure to
act which occurred during the course of this dispute.
Specifically this is to be understood as follows:
(1) That R.T.E. agree to the unconditional restoration of
their grade to the three staff who have been demoted.
(2) That Union members undertake to recommend to their
Unions that no disciplinary action be taken against any
member of Management or any member of staff in
categories which are to be the subject of discussion
under para C of this recommendation, as a result of
actions taken or not taken in the course of this
dispute.
(3) In this context the Court is accepting the assurances of
I.C.T.U. that, within its own procedures, it will uphold
this element of the Recommendation.
Further in this respect the Court quite independently of the
parties to the dispute wishes it clearly understood that in
the event of this Recommendation being accepted, any punitive
action taken against any person as defined in para 2 above
will be considered a breach of good faith and completely
contrary to proper industrial practice.
(G) Resumption of Work
Finally the Court would recommend that in the event of
acceptance of this recommendation, that an early and orderly
resumption of normal working should take place as soon as
possible.
RECOMMENDATION:
The full recommendation of the document is not available on the
add field.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_______________________
14th February, 1992 Deputy Chairman.
T.O'D./J.C.