Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92260 Case Number: LCR13723 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: TELECOM EIREANN - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION, BUILDING AND;ALLIED TRADES UNION, AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING UNION, AUTOMOBILE;GENERAL ENGINEERING AND MECHANICAL OPERATIVES UNION, UNION OF;CONSTRUCTION ALLIED TRADES & TECHNICIAN |
Dispute concerning restructuring and its effects on Craft workers pay.
Recommendation:
The Court having considered the views expressed by the parties in
their oral and written submissions does not find grounds for
concession of the Unions' claim.
The Court considers however that the proposal of the Company to
continue the pay relationship of the workers concerned by
reference to a grade which is now defunct to be inappropriate.
The Court recommends therefore that the parties negotiate a
suitable linkage with an operational grade, the negotiations to be
completed within one month of the date of issue of this
recommendation.
In the event that agreement is not reached between the parties the
Court will review the progress of the negotiations and issue a
Recommendation.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
S
Worker: Mr. Walsh
Body:
CD92260 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13723
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: TELECOM EIREANN
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION, BUILDING AND
ALLIED TRADES UNION, AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING UNION, AUTOMOBILE
GENERAL ENGINEERING AND MECHANICAL OPERATIVES UNION, UNION OF
CONSTRUCTION ALLIED TRADES & TECHNICIANS
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning restructuring and its effects on Craft
workers pay.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1986, following the rejection of Labour Court
Recommendation LCR10129, the Company and the Unions reached an
agreement (Appendix 1) whereby the wages and conditions of the
craft grades were to be determined by direct comparison with the
grade of installer. Since 1986 the terms of the Agreement have
been fully adhered to with the craft grade enjoying pay parity
with the installer grade.
In 1991, as a result of a restructuring package within technical
grades (details supplied to the Court), the installer grade was
regraded to that of customer operations technician II. Though
this effectively resulted in the abolition of the grade of
installer, the Company did not propose any changes to the grade of
craft worker. The Company contends that the pay scale applicable
to installers will be retained and therefore that parity with the
grade of craft worker be maintained. The Unions reject the
Company's claim and states that such an arrangement is
unacceptable to them. They do not accept that their members
should have parity with a grade that no longer exists.
As the dispute was not resolved at a meeting of the National Joint
Industrial Council on 3rd February, 1992, it was referred to the
Court by the Labour Relations Commission, in accordance with
Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court
investigated the dispute on 3rd June, 1992.
UNIONS ARGUMENTS:
1. Under the 1986 Agreement pay parity was established between
the grades of installer and craft worker. The work and duties of
each grade were never interchangeable but the comparison was
always maintained. Therefore, the Union contends, if any change
was/is to occur to the pay/conditions of the installers a similar
one should apply to the craft workers. The Union cannot accept
that pay parity should cease simply because there has been some
changes in the duties of the installers.
2. The Company's proposal that pay parity be maintained with the
pay scale of installer but not with the customer operations
technician grade to which the installers have been regraded is
totally unacceptable. This proposal, in effect, means pay parity
with a non-existent grade for which nobody will be negotiating.
By implementing the proposal, the Company is in breach of the 1986
Agreement on pay parity.
COMPANYS ARGUMENTS:
1. The restructuring of technical grades resulted in more than a
mere change of title. Under the new structure workers previously
known as installers are expected to perform a much wider range of
duties than before. No such change has occurred in the work of
the craftsman which warrants the establishment of a link with the
new grade.
2. The pay scale of installer will be maintained and will be
subject to all pay rises. A formal link will be established, for
pay purposes, with a serving grade within the Company and all
appropriate increases will be applicable.
3. The claim by the Union for establishing a link with the
customer operation technician II is a cost increasing one and is,
therefore, prohibited under the condition of the Programme for
Economic and Social Payment.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court having considered the views expressed by the parties in
their oral and written submissions does not find grounds for
concession of the Unions' claim.
The Court considers however that the proposal of the Company to
continue the pay relationship of the workers concerned by
reference to a grade which is now defunct to be inappropriate.
The Court recommends therefore that the parties negotiate a
suitable linkage with an operational grade, the negotiations to be
completed within one month of the date of issue of this
recommendation.
In the event that agreement is not reached between the parties the
Court will review the progress of the negotiations and issue a
Recommendation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
29th July, 1992 Tom McGrath
A.O.S./M.H. -----------------------------
Deputy Chairman.
NOTE:
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Ms. Aoibheann Ni Shuilleabhain, Court Secretary.
APPENDIX 1
The Irish Congress of Trade Unions, having discussed with Telecom
Eireann the dispute involving grades represented at the Joint
Industrial Council of the Company, makes the following
recommendations for acceptance by the parties.
1. The duties of the grades involved should be extended as
appropriate to meet the wider needs which arise from the
general development of the services provided by the Company
and to enable full co-operation to be afforded in work
methods, practices and procedures appropriate to their
existing grades including co-operation with other grades.
Within this framework, the staff concerned should operate
within the range of their skills and training.
2. The wages and conditions of the grades concerned should, in
future, be determined by direct comparison with the grade of
Installer for Craftsmen and Stores Officer Grade III for
Factory Workers, these comparisons to be applied with effect
from 1 January 1986. These arrangements for the
determination of the pay and conditions of the grades
concerned should supersede any other basis for such
determination.
3. In accordance with these recommendations the scales of pay as
set out in the attached schedule should apply with effect
from the dates shown. Assimilation should take place as
indicated in the schedule.
4. As the dates of application of the new scales would be 1
January 1986 and the dates of application of the two phases
of the 25th Pay Round are 1 January 1986 and 1 July 1986
respectively, it is recommended that standard retrospection
be paid to each of the workers concerned and that this should
be #625.
5. The Company-wide bonus scheme should apply to the grades
involved on a similar basis to the agreement registered at
the Joint Conciliation Council.
6. Congress further recommends that the recommendations should
be the subject of an aggregate ballot of the Union members in
the grades involved.