Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93296 Case Number: LCR14247 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE |
Regrading.
Recommendation:
The Court in dealing with this list of claims for upgrading was
in the unusual position of being asked to assess and re-value
posts which were graded in an institution (Thomond College)
which is now abolished and where staff have been assimilated
into the University of Limerick.
As the claim was lodged prior to the dissolution of Thomond
College it is correctly before the Court. However,
the assessment could only be done by means of adjudication on
the verbal and written submissions as "on-the job" assessment
was impossible.
The Court received very detailed job descriptions from the
parties of the claimants work and the grade they aspired to
when employed at Thomond College. The Court is satisfied that
this information was sufficient to enable it to recommend on the
merits of the claims.
The Court draws attention to the fact that the parties agreed
that the claims and accordingly the assessments deal with the
work performed by the claimants in Thomond College and not with
their present positions with the University of Limerick.
Had the case been considered in the lifetime of Thomond College
the Court would naturally have looked to equivalent posts in
similar colleges and the University of Limerick would have been
an obvious institution to compare with. However, the Court
would add that in reaching its conclusions on the various claims
it had of necessity to take into account the level of
responsibility etc., of the equivalent grades in the University
as put forward by the parties.
The Court sets out below its recommendations with regard to
each of the cases made on behalf of the claimants.
(a)+(b) Mr. L. Kirby and Ms. J. Kennedy - Regrading from
Craft Assistant to Technician
The Duties carried out did not equate to the job
description submitted for Technicians.
Accordingly concession of the claim is not
recommended.
(c) Mr. J. Daly - Upgrading from Craft Assistant to
Technician.
The Court received additional information on Mr.
Daly's qualifications subsequent to the hearing.
Taking all the information into account the Court
is satisfied that Mr. Daly's qualification did not
meet the requirements of the higher post.
Accordingly concession of the claim is not
recommended
(d) Mr. W. Lane - Regrading from Athletic Grounds
Specialist to Technician
The Court notes that Mr. Lane had an established
relativity with Head Gardener/Groundsman grade in
Limerick Corporation. In addition he did not
possess the required qualification to fill a
Technicians post. The Court is satisfied that the
work he performed was correctly rewarded at Craft
Assistant rate.
Concession of claim not recommended.
(e) Dr. G. Mullen - Regrading from Lecturer to Senior
Lecturer.
The Court is satisfied that a well established and
clearly understood procedure exists for "promotion"
from Lecturer to Senior Lecturer which can only
start when a post at the senior level is available.
The claimant at no time in Thomond College was
debarred from so applying, nor was it reasonable to
assume that lack of any such post should
automatically have resulted in regrading.
The Court finds no merit in this claim.
(f) Ms. G. O'Riordan - Regrading from Assistant
Librarian to Sub Librarian.
Taking into account the staff numbers and the size
of the Library which warrants the appointment of a
sub Librarian the Court find no justification for
recommending concession of the claim.
(g) P. Flannery - Parity with grade of Senior Porter at
University of Limerick
Having examined the list of duties which were
performed by the claimant in Thomond College in
comparison with the duties of Senior
Porter/Attendant in Limerick University the Court
cannot find that parity between the posts has been
established.
(h) J. Pidgeon Regrading from Technician Grade II to
Senior Technician.
The Court notes that posts of Senior Technician are
normally filled by way of open competition and that
the claimant was graded as Technician on foot of a
Labour Court recommendation. Had a post at Senior
Technician level been available at Thomond College,
the claimant would have been free to apply then in
the normal way. Concession of the claim would
overturn the well established system whereby
progression is made from Technician Grade II to
higher grades.
The Court finds no merit in the claim.
The Court can understand that when it became clear to staff in
Thomond College that their institution was to be absorbed into
the University of Limerick they would have had regard to what
they perceived to be equivalent posts in the University and would
have had concerns about the levels at which they would be
assimilated into the bigger institution.
The Court, however, is satisfied that the pending merger did
not disadvantage the claimants during the latter periods of their
employment at Thomond College.
In summary the Court does not recommend concession of the
claims made by the Union.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93296 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14247
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK
and
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Regrading.
BACKGROUND:
2. The eight (8) workers concerned were originally employed at
Thomond College of Education. The Union's claims (A-H) were
submitted in late 1990 and early 1991. Details of present
grades, salaries, and those claimed are as follows:
Union's Claim
Claimant Present Present Grade Salary
Grade Salary Claimed Claimed
A. L Kirby Craft Assistant 16,346-19569 Technician 11 16,346-21,236
B. J Kennedy Craft Assistant 16,346-19569 Technician 11 16,346-21,236
C. J Daly Craft Assistant 16,346-19659 Technician 11 16,346-21,236
D. W Lane Athletic Grounds
Specialist 13,803-15729 Technician 1 16,346-19,569
E. Dr G Mullen Lecturer 21,020-34283 Senior Lecturer 28,720-37,747
F. G O'Riordan Assistant
Librarian 16,166-20137 Sub Librarian 21,020-31,584
G. P Flannery Senior Aide #208,07-219.94pw Parity with
Senior Porter #213.20-225.82
(University of p.w.
Limerick)
H. J Pidgeon Technical 2 16,346-21,236 Senior
Technician 20,310-23,628
(Details of all job descriptions at Thomond College and Limerick
University supplied to the Court).
The claims were rejected by Management on the grounds that the
workers were correctly graded. The dispute was referred to the
Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference was
held in June 1991. No agreement was reached. However it was
decided to refer the issues back to local level discussions
as legislation had been enacted in July, 1991 abolishing Thomond
College and integrating its functions with Limerick University,
in accordance with the University of Limerick (Dissolution of
Thomond College) Act, 1991. Section 7 of the Act provided for
the transfer of staff from Thomond College to Limerick
University "on terms and conditions not less favourable than
those applicable to staff prior to commencement of the Act".
2. Subsequent to the integration local discussions were
resumed but were not successful. The claims were again referred
to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference
was held in October, 1991. As no agreement was reached the
dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 6th May 1993. The
Court investigated the dispute in Limerick on 2nd June, 1993.
The hearing was adjourned to enable the parties submit
additional information which was considered by the Court.
The Court resumed its hearing of the dispute in Limerick on the
30th, September,1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. For some of the claimants the merger has resulted in a
considerable change in their duties. The claims, however,
must be considered in the context of the workers duties and
responsibilities at Thomond College. The 'terms and
conditions' referred to in the Act include agreements to deal
with claims for re-grading in accordance with good industrial
relations practice. It is not good industrial relations
practice for the employer to remove the basis for a claim for
re-grading by changing workers jobs after the claim has been
submitted.
2. In a similar previous claim for re-grading (L.C.R. 13543
refers) the Court accepted "the Union's contention that the
provisions of the Act should not be used to frustrate the
claim of the worker which was being processed when the Act
came into operation". On this particular case the Court
recommended "that the worker's grade should be determined by
the grade appropriate to the work she was doing prior to the
establishment of Limerick University and the dissolution of
Thomond College". This principle should be upheld and applied
in cases where workers' jobs changed substantially following
the merger.
3. It is the Union's contention that claims A - E do not
involve outside comparisons but the issue in dispute is the
placing of workers on their correct grade within an already
existing salary structure. Claims F-H do involve comparison
with Limerick University, an institution with which Thomond
College shared common staff for many years.
4. Claims seeking individual promotion within an existing
promotional structure, which assert that a worker has not been
fairly treated by the operation of that structure, should not
be restricted by the P.E.S.P. The Union will accept the
Court's interpretation of how claims involving outside
comparisons should be dealt with in the context of P.E.S.P.
UNIVERSITY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The claimants were all correctly graded at Thomond
College. In the post-integration situation the duties as
performed by most of the claimants remain the same. The
University of Limerick, in compliance with the legislation
enacted to effect the integration which guaranteed that staff
of the former Thomond College would be transferred on terms
and conditions not less favourable than those previously
enjoyed, reassigned staff to areas, without loss of service
etc., to perform duties appropriate to their grades.
2. The University refutes the Union's contention that the
claims should be seen within the context of Thomond College as
that organisation no longer existed. Given that Thomond
College was a smaller organisation it was logical that staff
were required to carry out a relatively broad range of tasks
but at a level commensurate with the duties involved. While
some of the workers transferred may now have positions which
could be deemed to be more focused, they are still within the
level of competence required and remunerated accordingly.
3. Concession of the claims would have serious repercussive
effects for other grades. Regrading from Lecturer to Senior
Lecturer is not a normal occurrence, nor is regrading among
the technical or other grades. The University is operating
under severe financial constraints and cannot afford the cost
of conceding the claims.
4. If the claims were conceded they would fall to be dealt
with in accordance with the terms of the P.E.S.P.
Recommendation:
The Court in dealing with this list of claims for upgrading was
in the unusual position of being asked to assess and re-value
posts which were graded in an institution (Thomond College)
which is now abolished and where staff have been assimilated
into the University of Limerick.
As the claim was lodged prior to the dissolution of Thomond
College it is correctly before the Court. However,
the assessment could only be done by means of adjudication on
the verbal and written submissions as "on-the job" assessment
was impossible.
The Court received very detailed job descriptions from the
parties of the claimants work and the grade they aspired to
when employed at Thomond College. The Court is satisfied that
this information was sufficient to enable it to recommend on the
merits of the claims.
The Court draws attention to the fact that the parties agreed
that the claims and accordingly the assessments deal with the
work performed by the claimants in Thomond College and not with
their present positions with the University of Limerick.
Had the case been considered in the lifetime of Thomond College
the Court would naturally have looked to equivalent posts in
similar colleges and the University of Limerick would have been
an obvious institution to compare with. However, the Court
would add that in reaching its conclusions on the various claims
it had of necessity to take into account the level of
responsibility etc., of the equivalent grades in the University
as put forward by the parties.
The Court sets out below its recommendations with regard to
each of the cases made on behalf of the claimants.
(a)+(b) Mr. L. Kirby and Ms. J. Kennedy - Regrading from
Craft Assistant to Technician
The Duties carried out did not equate to the job
description submitted for Technicians.
Accordingly concession of the claim is not
recommended.
(c) Mr. J. Daly - Upgrading from Craft Assistant to
Technician.
The Court received additional information on Mr.
Daly's qualifications subsequent to the hearing.
Taking all the information into account the Court
is satisfied that Mr. Daly's qualification did not
meet the requirements of the higher post.
Accordingly concession of the claim is not
recommended
(d) Mr. W. Lane - Regrading from Athletic Grounds
Specialist to Technician
The Court notes that Mr. Lane had an established
relativity with Head Gardener/Groundsman grade in
Limerick Corporation. In addition he did not
possess the required qualification to fill a
Technicians post. The Court is satisfied that the
work he performed was correctly rewarded at Craft
Assistant rate.
Concession of claim not recommended.
(e) Dr. G. Mullen - Regrading from Lecturer to Senior
Lecturer.
The Court is satisfied that a well established and
clearly understood procedure exists for "promotion"
from Lecturer to Senior Lecturer which can only
start when a post at the senior level is available.
The claimant at no time in Thomond College was
debarred from so applying, nor was it reasonable to
assume that lack of any such post should
automatically have resulted in regrading.
The Court finds no merit in this claim.
(f) Ms. G. O'Riordan - Regrading from Assistant
Librarian to Sub Librarian.
Taking into account the staff numbers and the size
of the Library which warrants the appointment of a
sub Librarian the Court find no justification for
recommending concession of the claim.
(g) P. Flannery - Parity with grade of Senior Porter at
University of Limerick
Having examined the list of duties which were
performed by the claimant in Thomond College in
comparison with the duties of Senior
Porter/Attendant in Limerick University the Court
cannot find that parity between the posts has been
established.
(h) J. Pidgeon Regrading from Technician Grade II to
Senior Technician.
The Court notes that posts of Senior Technician are
normally filled by way of open competition and that
the claimant was graded as Technician on foot of a
Labour Court recommendation. Had a post at Senior
Technician level been available at Thomond College,
the claimant would have been free to apply then in
the normal way. Concession of the claim would
overturn the well established system whereby
progression is made from Technician Grade II to
higher grades.
The Court finds no merit in the claim.
The Court can understand that when it became clear to staff in
Thomond College that their institution was to be absorbed into
the University of Limerick they would have had regard to what
they perceived to be equivalent posts in the University and would
have had concerns about the levels at which they would be
assimilated into the bigger institution.
The Court, however, is satisfied that the pending merger did
not disadvantage the claimants during the latter periods of their
employment at Thomond College.
In summary the Court does not recommend concession of the
claims made by the Union.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
________________________
12th November, 1993. Deputy Chairman
T.O'D./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.