Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92154 Case Number: LCR13688 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: PRIVATE AGRICULTURAL COLLEGES - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE |
A dispute concerning a claim by the Union for (a) the upgrading of Assistant Lecturers to Lecturer 1. (b) the indexation of a #300 payment for short courses.
Recommendation:
REGRADING CLAIM:
5. The Court has considered the detailed written and oral
submissions made by the parties at the hearing on 14th May, 1992.
While the Court notes that the claimants jobs have changed over
the years to accommodate agricultural/educational developments,
the Court does not consider that a case has been established to
justify classifying the courses for which they are responsible as
being of 3rd level. Accordingly, the Court does not recommend
concession of this claim.
INDEXATION CLAIM:
The Court recommends that the #300 payment for short courses
recommended by LCR10554 should be index linked to pay awards to
the claimants with effect from the first such payment in 1988.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92154 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13688
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1)INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: PRIVATE AGRICULTURAL COLLEGES
(Represented by Federation of Irish Employers)
and
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. A dispute concerning a claim by the Union for
(a) the upgrading of Assistant Lecturers to Lecturer 1.
(b) the indexation of a #300 payment for short courses.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1980, on foot of a Labour Court Recommendation (LCR5618),
the teachers employed in the Colleges concerned were graded as
Assistant Lecturers. This brought them in line with their
counterparts in the Regional Technical Colleges (R.T.C.). In
1981, due to organisational changes within the structure of the
Colleges of Technology, the grade of Assistant Lecturer was
abolished and that grade was assimilated into the Lecturer 1
grade. The Union made a claim for a similar upgrading for the
workers here concerned and the claim was heard but rejected by the
Labour Court (LCR6758).
In 1991 a further claim was submitted to the Colleges for
upgrading to Lecturer 1. On top of this the Union claimed the
indexation of a #300 lump sum awarded by the Labour Court
(LCR10554) to members teaching courses of a short duration. The
claims were rejected by the Colleges.
The dispute was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Relations Commission on 12th August, 1991. A conciliation
conference was held on 26th November, 1991 at which agreement was
not reached. The issue was referred to the Labour Court on 26th
February, 1992 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on 14th May, 1992.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union maintains that the courses which are available
in the Colleges are third level courses or the equivalent and
as such are similar to those taught in the Regional Technical
Colleges. In the Regional Technical Colleges and Colleges of
Technology under the control of VECs, teachers are classed as
Lecturer 1 if they are required to spend in excess of 40% of
timetable hours teaching third level courses. Therefore the
claim for upgrading in the Colleges concerned is justified.
2. In the past decade major changes have taken place in the
work of an agricultural teacher. With progress in technology
they are required to use, and to train students in the use of
computers. The format of examinations has changed resulting
in an increase in responsibility and in supervisory duties.
Agriculture is changing and progressing more rapidly and
teachers must be able to adapt to and keep up with this
change. The teachers are also to perform many administrative
duties on a weekly basis. All these changes are similar to
those affecting the Regional Technical Colleges but for which
the agricultural teachers have not been rewarded.
3. Staff in two other second level Colleges have been
upgraded. (Details supplied to the Court). In the first case
the College itself has been upgraded to a third level college.
In the second case however, the College itself has remained
classified as a second level college but teachers have been
upgraded because the quality of the courses was considered to
be equivalent to that of third level courses.
4. The Union is seeking the indexation of the annual #300
lump sum and that this indexation be in line with increases in
basic salary since the date of Labour Court Recommendation
10554.
COLLEGES' ARGUMENT:
4. 1. The Colleges cannot accept that their courses are third
level courses or the equivalent. They have been refused
recognition as a third level College by the National Council
of Education Awards (NCEA) on the grounds that completion of a
second level course is not a prerequisite for entry. Moreover
the ACOT Act, prohibits the Colleges from engaging in third
level education. This stipulation was not amended by the
Teagasc Act.
2. The Colleges rejects the claim for upgrading on the
grounds that there have been no significant changes in the
duties of the teachers since the issuing of Labour Court
Recommendation 6758. Any changes which have occurred are part
of on-going change and ones which teachers, in the normal
course of events, are expected to keep up with.
4. 3. In the case of the two colleges mentioned by the Union
the former is run by the VEC. The latter was only certified
as third level by CERT and not by the NCEA.
4. The Colleges made an offer at conciliation regarding the
indexation of payments for short courses. This offer still
stands and is as follows:-
"That the #300 awarded by the Labour Court to attract
national wage increases with effect from 1/1/91.
The payment in 1991 therefore would be #312.00 i.e.
#300+4% and in 1992 the payment would be #321.36, i.e.
#312+3%.
RECOMMENDATION:
REGRADING CLAIM:
5. The Court has considered the detailed written and oral
submissions made by the parties at the hearing on 14th May, 1992.
While the Court notes that the claimants jobs have changed over
the years to accommodate agricultural/educational developments,
the Court does not consider that a case has been established to
justify classifying the courses for which they are responsible as
being of 3rd level. Accordingly, the Court does not recommend
concession of this claim.
INDEXATION CLAIM:
The Court recommends that the #300 payment for short courses
recommended by LCR10554 should be index linked to pay awards to
the claimants with effect from the first such payment in 1988.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
19th June, 1992 ---------------
A.O'S/U.S. Chairman
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed
to Aoibheann Ni Shuilleabhain, Court Secretary.