Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93470 Case Number: LCR14269 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: IRISH COUNTRYWOMEN'S ASSOCIATION - and - A WORKER |
Hearing arising from Labour Court Recommendation 13995.
Recommendation:
The Court recognises fully the frustration of the claimant at the
delays experienced in bringing his claim to finality. Equally,
the Court finds it disturbing that the claim of the Private
College principals, which is not dissimilar to the claim before
the Court, has not yet been brought to finality.
The Court considers, however, that whilst the claim on behalf of
all principals has not exhausted the procedures, it would be
inappropriate to issue a finding in respect of one claimant.
Accordingly, the Court recommends that he await the outcome of the
Private Agricultural Principals claim and that both parties use
their good offices to have this claim expedited as quickly as
possible.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93470 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14269
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: IRISH COUNTRYWOMEN'S ASSOCIATION
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Hearing arising from Labour Court Recommendation 13995.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The dispute concerns Labour Court Recommendation 13995
which concerned the grading and salary of the post of
principal at the Association's College of Horticulture in Co.
Louth. The background to the dispute has not changed. The
Court in its recommendation on 22nd March, 1993 stated that:
"....the Court defers any further consideration of the
merits of the claim in respect of the Principal of the
I.C.A. Horticultural College.
In the event that the claim of the Principals of the
Agricultural and Horticultural Colleges is not resolved
within a reasonable period the Court, at the request of
the claimant, will review the matter".
2. The matter was not resolved and the worker in question
referred the dispute to the Labour Court on 4th August, 1993
to review the issue under section 20(1) of the Industrial
Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on
20th October, 1993.
WORKER'S ARGUMENT:
2. 1. Teagasc has rejected the claim on the grounds that the
principals of private colleges have greater annual leave than
principals of Teagasc colleges. Due to pressure of work the
average annual leave taken by principals in private colleges
is only 20 days per annum.
2. The expense allowance for a principal of a private
college has not increased since 1987.
3. Additional duties taken on by principals of private
colleges mean that their workload is as great as principals
of Teagasc colleges. Private colleges do not have assistant
principals to take over when a principal is on annual leave.
ASSOCIATION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Annual leave arrangements for principals of private
colleges are more favourable than those of Teagasc college
principals.
2. The Association's position regarding the worker is the
same as it was at the Labour Court hearing on 2nd March,
1993.
3. A somewhat similar claim had been lodged on behalf of
all Principals of Private Agricultural Colleges. Teagasc had
however rejected the claim and had conveyed this to the
Association in September. That position had not changed to
date.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court recognises fully the frustration of the claimant at the
delays experienced in bringing his claim to finality. Equally,
the Court finds it disturbing that the claim of the Private
College principals, which is not dissimilar to the claim before
the Court, has not yet been brought to finality.
The Court considers, however, that whilst the claim on behalf of
all principals has not exhausted the procedures, it would be
inappropriate to issue a finding in respect of one claimant.
Accordingly, the Court recommends that he await the outcome of the
Private Agricultural Principals claim and that both parties use
their good offices to have this claim expedited as quickly as
possible.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
30th November, 1993 Tom McGrath
C.O.N./A.L. _______________
Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this recommendation should by addressed to
Mr. Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.