Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94272 Case Number: LCR14513 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning a claim for the payment of increments to temporary and contract workers.
Recommendation:
The Court notes that the College accept the arguments put forward
and the merits of the claim and concede in principle the claim of
the Union.
They are however constrained by lack of funding from addressing
the problem.
Noting these constraints it is the Recommendation of the Court
that the parties seek to find a basis by which the payment of
merits to temporary and contract staff may be made.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94272 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14513
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning a claim for the payment of increments to
temporary and contract workers.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Union submitted a claim on behalf of eighty
administrative, secretarial, library and computer staff.
The claim seeks incremental credit up to a maximum of
the fifth point on the relevant scale on the following
basis:-
(a) 2 increments may be granted with effect from 1st
January, 1993 for those with two years' full-time
continuous service or the equivalent of two years'
aggregate service in the preceding 3 years in the
education service.
(b) A further increment may be granted, if appropriate,
not earlier than 1st January, 1994.
(c) A final increment may be granted, if appropriate,
not earlier than 1st January, 1995.
Increments payable on 1st January, 1994 and 1st January,
1995 would be subject to having worked a year's
full-time satisfactory service in the preceding year or
on such date thereafter when an aggregate year's service
has been worked
2. The College rejected the claim and it was referred to
the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation
conference was held on 30th March, 1994. A negotiated
solution was not possible and on 9th May, 1994, the
claim was referred to the Labour Court under Section
26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour
Court investigation took place on 22nd June, 1994 (the
earliest date suitable to both parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Increments are paid to temporary employees of other
Irish Universities (details supplied). The College's
temporary academic staff are entitled to increments.
Other employees are entitled to a similar consideration.
2. In 1992, the Department of Health sanctioned the same
incremental credits (details supplied) being sought by
the claimants. As the Department of Health and the
Department of Education are funded by the State, the
claimants are entitled to no less favourable conditions
of employment than their colleagues in the health
service.
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. It is not common practice to pay increments to temporary
and contract staff in the Education sector. Throughout
the sector, there are hundreds of workers employed on
this basis. Consequently, the economic knock-on effect
of conceding the claim would be enormous,
2. The College and the Union are parties to the Programme
for Competitiveness and Work (PCW). The claim before
the Court is cost-increasing and as such can only be
dealt with within the terms of the PCW. The College
does not have the funds to consider conceding the claim.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court notes that the College accept the arguments put forward
and the merits of the claim and concede in principle the claim of
the Union.
They are however constrained by lack of funding from addressing
the problem.
Noting these constraints it is the Recommendation of the Court
that the parties seek to find a basis by which the payment of
merits to temporary and contract staff may be made.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
22nd July, 1994 Tom McGrath
J.F./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.