Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93196 Case Number: LCR14081 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: DUBLIN CORPORATION - and - IRISH MUNICIPAL AND CIVIL TRADE UNIONS;SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
The hearing arising from Labour Court recommendation L.C.R. 13750 concerning a claim by the Unions for an increase in the eating-on-site allowance.
Recommendation:
6. The Court has considered the further arguments made in respect
of this claim in the context of the terms of L.C.R. 13750.
Since it is now clear that national negotiations which have taken
place will not influence the positions of Dublin Corporation staff
the Unions have now sought to process their original claim.
As regard the merits of the case the Court has some difficulty in
accepting that the payment of the allowance over the wide range of
staff to whom it is now applicable is completely justified and is
entirely satisfied that an adjustment necessary to restore it to
1981 value is totally unwarranted.
Taking a totally pragmatic view of the claim the Court would be
willing to consider some amendment to the present amount but is
conscious that in doing so it would preclude further claims under
P.E.S.P.
Taking these factors into account and in order to be of assistance
to both parties the Court recommends that the claim be considered
as part of a Clause 3 of P.E.S.P. package, in which event, if the
Corporation were to offer an adjustment of 37p per day on the
allowance the Court would consider such an offer reasonable in the
circumstances.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93196 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14081
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: DUBLIN CORPORATION
and
IRISH MUNICIPAL AND CIVIL TRADE UNIONS
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. The hearing arising from Labour Court recommendation L.C.R.
13750 concerning a claim by the Unions for an increase in the
eating-on-site allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. In Labour Court recommendation No. L.C.R. 13750 the Court
recommended as follows:
"The Court has given very careful consideration to the
detailed arguments made by the parties on the issue of eating
on site allowance.
In the first place the Court is quite clear that the claim
being pursued by the Unions must be considered a new claim
and not the renewal of a claim rejected by the Labour Court
in 1987 and therefore, the issue falls to be dealt with under
the terms of the P.E.S.P. In the opinion of the Court it is
not possible to consider the Unions' claim in isolation from
a number of other issues raised by the Corporation in its
submissions, including the fact that the Unions are pursuing
a claim for a special increase for General Operative grades
in Dublin Corporation.
Since under the terms of P.E.S.P. only one cost increasing
claim may be pursued, the Court has some difficulty in seeing
the present claim as valid within the terms of the Programme.
It would seem to the Court that the Unions need to clarify
their policy in this respect before a definitive
recommendation on the claim can reasonably be requested of
the Court.
The Court in light of the fact that the allowance is a
significant element in the pay of local authorities generally
also takes the view that the claim cannot be considered in
isolation from the proposed discussions at national level and
concurs with the Corporation's view that any amendment of the
current allowance would be premature pending the conclusion
of such discussions".
3. Following correspondence from the parties subsequent to the
issue of L.C.R. 13750 a further Labour Court hearing took place on
16th April, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In Recommendation L.C.R. 13750 the Court outlined a number
of reasons as to why it would not issue a definitive
recommendation on the claim. Circumstances have changed since
that time (details supplied to the Court) and the Court is now
asked to recommend on the Unions' claim.
CORPORATION'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The arguments presented by the Corporation at the Labour
Court hearing held on 24th June, 1992 still stand.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. The Court has considered the further arguments made in respect
of this claim in the context of the terms of L.C.R. 13750.
Since it is now clear that national negotiations which have taken
place will not influence the positions of Dublin Corporation staff
the Unions have now sought to process their original claim.
As regard the merits of the case the Court has some difficulty in
accepting that the payment of the allowance over the wide range of
staff to whom it is now applicable is completely justified and is
entirely satisfied that an adjustment necessary to restore it to
1981 value is totally unwarranted.
Taking a totally pragmatic view of the claim the Court would be
willing to consider some amendment to the present amount but is
conscious that in doing so it would preclude further claims under
P.E.S.P.
Taking these factors into account and in order to be of assistance
to both parties the Court recommends that the claim be considered
as part of a Clause 3 of P.E.S.P. package, in which event, if the
Corporation were to offer an adjustment of 37p per day on the
allowance the Court would consider such an offer reasonable in the
circumstances.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
______________________
14th May, 1993. Deputy Chairman
M.D./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Michael Daughen, Court Secretary.