Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94285 Case Number: LCR14562 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE |
Dispute concerning the status and responsibilities of the Head of Accommodation
Recommendation:
(1) The Court notes the status of PCC Ltd and in so far as
it provides accommodation for students and university staff
finds it is similar to the private landlords with whom the
University liaises for accommodation.
(2) It is the view of the Court that a situation has been allowed
to develop where the PCC Ltd, a private organisation which is
selling accommodation, has been allowed to interfere with the
procedures operated by the accommodation officer on behalf of
the University's students and staff.
(3) The Court finds that the University's Accommodation Officer
should deal with the accommodation requirements of University
staff and students and carry out her duties in liaison with
the PCC Ltd as with other landlords.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94285 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14562
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK
AND
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the status and responsibilities of the
Head of Accommodation
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The worker was appointed as Accommodation Officer (now
Head of Accommodation Services) in a temporary capacity
on 18th March, 1979. She was appointed to the post from
May, 1985. The worker's post was sanctioned by the
Higher Education Authority. The student population has
risen from 1,594 in 1981 to 6,000 in 1994.
2. In 1985, the University formed Plassey Campus Centre
Ltd. (PCC). The Company built Plassey student village
and it is charged with the promotion, management and
occupancy of it. In 1991 the Union referred the issue
of the worker's duties and responsibilities to the
Labour Relations Commission. The worker felt that her
position was being eroded by the actions of PCC Limited
which had taken a very active involvement in the student
accommodation application process,
3. The Union again raised the issue in 1993 and it was the
subject of a conciliation conference on 23rd July and
16th November, 1993. The dispute again arose from the
University's decision to make operational changes in
regard to the allocation of student accommodation.
B
It was proposed at conciliation on 23rd July that the
accommodation office would deal with all first year
applications for Plassey student village and that PCC
Ltd. would deal directly with all other applicants.
This was unacceptable to the Union.
4. No further progress was made at conciliation. On 13th
May, 1994, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court
under section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act,
1990. A Labour Court investigation took place in
Limerick on 30th June, 1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Head of Accommodation Services has been responsible
for all accommodation services provided by the
University and should continue to be so responsible.
The worker is seeking to have the status of her position
maintained at a level which she has exercised from the
date of her appointment up to the time that the
University sought to transfer some of her
responsibilities to the manager of PCC Limited.
2. The Union objects to the University's policy of
transferring the functions of a direct University
employee to private companies such as PCC Ltd. There
has never been an agreement concerning the transfer of
responsibilities for accommodation services. Any
agreement reached has reaffirmed the status and
responsibilities of the worker. The University has not
honoured its agreement of 1991 (details supplied).
3. All accommodation for the University must be handled
through the head of accommodations services. In order
that all workers be protected, a policy document should
be drawn up clearly defining the role of private
concerns on campus and their relationship (if any) with
University personnel.
UNIVERSITY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker was appointed to provide a service on rental
accommodation options. Her duties and responsibilities
have not changed in the intervening period except to the
extent that student numbers have increased. There has
been no encroachment on or diminution of the role of the
Head of Accommodation Services.
2. The University acknowledges that several factors
(details supplied) have resulted in operational changes
in the way in which the accommodation office provides
its services. As is inevitable in any growth
organisation coping with major change, organisational
changes have occurred but the worker's responsibilities
remain the same. The worker's remit does not include
actual placement of students in accommodation whether it
is on or off campus.
3. PCC Ltd. has a brief of maximising the utilisation of
residency in Plassey village. It does not conflict with
the brief of the accommodation office which is to
provide a choice of accommodation to students. Any
attempt to link the roles and functions of PCC Ltd. and
the accommodation office would be futile and counter-
productive to the aims and objectives of both parties.
RECOMMENDATION:
(1) The Court notes the status of PCC Ltd and in so far as
it provides accommodation for students and university staff
finds it is similar to the private landlords with whom the
University liaises for accommodation.
(2) It is the view of the Court that a situation has been allowed
to develop where the PCC Ltd, a private organisation which is
selling accommodation, has been allowed to interfere with the
procedures operated by the accommodation officer on behalf of
the University's students and staff.
(3) The Court finds that the University's Accommodation Officer
should deal with the accommodation requirements of University
staff and students and carry out her duties in liaison with
the PCC Ltd as with other landlords.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
30th Septeber, 1994 Tom McGrath
J.F./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.