Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94269 Case Number: LCR14522 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: DUBLIN CORPORATION - and - BUILDING AND ALLIED TRADES' UNION;UNION OF CONSTRUCTION ALLIED TRADES AND TECHNICIANS |
Craft structure at supervisory level.
Recommendation:
The Court has considered all of the arguments made by the parties
in their oral and written submissions.
The Court notes that civil trade craftsmen may apply for civil
trade promotional positions in other departments.
It is clear to the Court that notwithstanding their being able to
apply for posts in the Parks Department, in reality there is
little prospect of their being offered such posts.
The Court considers it is not unreasonable that a civil craftsman
should have the expectation of improving his/her position in
his/her own department. It appears to the Court that civil
tradesmen within the Parks Department have little opportunity of
achieving this.
In all the circumstances the Court considers the Management and
the Unions should discuss the issue with a view to addressing the
matter meaningfully.
In the light of the above and given the conditions attaching to
the payment of chargehand rates to craftsmen working without
supervision the Court does not consider concession of the Unions'
claim would be appropriate.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94269 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14522
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
DUBLIN CORPORATION
AND
BUILDING AND ALLIED TRADES' UNION
UNION OF CONSTRUCTION ALLIED TRADES AND TECHNICIANS
SUBJECT:
1. Craft structure at supervisory level.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns twenty-nine craft workers (civil) who
are employed in the Parks Department at various locations.
Traditionally the Parks Department had a supervisory
structure comprising Supervisory Gardeners Grade 1 and 2.
They supervised gardeners, craftpersons, and general
operatives. In 1980, following the issue of Labour Court
Recommendations 12789 and 13321, gardeners were upgraded to
craft status and following negotiations between the parties a
new supervisory craft structure was established. A
competition which was open to all craftspersons (including
civil crafts) was held for the following posts:-
2 Foreman Trades (working)
5 Assistant Foreman Trades (working)
23 Chargehand Trades (working)
One civil craftsperson and twenty-nine gardeners were
successful. Subsequently the Unions submitted a claim that
individual craftworkers working without craft supervision be
regraded as chargehands and paid the Local Authority
chargehand rate. The claim was rejected by the Corporation.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission
and a conciliation conference was held on the 16th March,
1994. As no agreement could be reached the dispute was
referred to the Labour Court on the 16th May, 1994. The
Court investigated the dispute on the 10th June, 1994.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Unions accept the rationale which gave craft status
to gardeners and also the supervisory structure which
was established. However, in view of the results of the
competition for supervisory posts the Union feels that
the civil craft trades were treated in a most unfair
manner with only one of their members being successful.
This worker already held a temporary supervisory post.
2. The civil craftpersons work daily without supervision
and have many of the qualities necessary to carry out
supervisory duties. No panel was formed from the
competition to fill future vacancies and the craft group
feels that civil craftpersons will not attain
supervisory posts in the Parks Department.
3. There are already a number of precedents in the
Corporation whereby craftworkers working without
supervision are paid the craft chargehands' rate e.g.,
engineering workers in the Stanley Street Depot and also
in the Waterworks Department (details supplied to the
Court).
4. The workers concerned accept that they will not be
assimilated into the new supervisory structure. This
deprives the Parks Department of the benefit of a fully
integrated craft supervisory structure and prevents
civil craftspersons from making a full contribution to
running the Department and receiving due recognition.
They work daily unsupervised and perform duties which in
other departments of the Corporation would be considered
worthy of recognition and appropriate remuneration.
CORPORATION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The competition held for supervisors' posts was
conducted in a fair manner and the most meritorious
workers were appointed. Under the new supervisory
structure there is one supervisor craftsperson, for
every 1.4 craftperson, considerably in excess of the
ratio in other sections of the Corporation.
2. There are specific situations where chargehand rates are
paid to craftpersons relating to unsupervised 'call out'
or where operating in an unsupervised environment. The
civil trades in the Parks Department have always been
supervised and this system has proved adequate. The
work carried out by civil craftspersons is routine in
nature.
3. Any additional supervisory structure would not be cost-
effective and would jeopardise the nature and level of
service supplied in the Parks Department.
4. There are many openings throughout the Corporation for
Supervisory Craft positions open to the workers
concerned while craft gardeners are only eligible to
apply for supervisory craft posts in the Parks
Department.
5. Concession of the claim would involve either an increase
in expenditure or a reduction in the level of service
provided in the Parks Department. In addition, there
would be serious financial implications for the
Corporation with repercussive claims from other groups.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered all of the arguments made by the parties
in their oral and written submissions.
The Court notes that civil trade craftsmen may apply for civil
trade promotional positions in other departments.
It is clear to the Court that notwithstanding their being able to
apply for posts in the Parks Department, in reality there is
little prospect of their being offered such posts.
The Court considers it is not unreasonable that a civil craftsman
should have the expectation of improving his/her position in
his/her own department. It appears to the Court that civil
tradesmen within the Parks Department have little opportunity of
achieving this.
In all the circumstances the Court considers the Management and
the Unions should discuss the issue with a view to addressing the
matter meaningfully.
In the light of the above and given the conditions attaching to
the payment of chargehand rates to craftsmen working without
supervision the Court does not consider concession of the Unions'
claim would be appropriate.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
26th July, 1994 Tom McGrath
T.O.D./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.