Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94712 Case Number: AD9528 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE GALWAY - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. ST 255/94.
Recommendation:
The Court considered the written and oral submissions made by both
sides. The Court supports the Rights Commissioner's finding to
have an interim settlement pending a proper job evaluation. This
evaluation should take place without delay.
However, having considered all the circumstances of this
particular case, the Court is of the view that a more appropriate
interim salary-placing for the claimant would be the second point
of the Administrative Officer scale.
The Court so decides.
Division: Mr Flood Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94712 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD2895
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE GALWAY
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. ST
255/94.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns a claim on behalf of one worker, who is
Supervisor of Engineering Services, for a salary scale to the
region of #32k, rising to #40k, with substantial
retrospection. The claim was rejected by the College. A
review of the worker's post was carried out on behalf of the
College in September, 1993, by an expert group of three,
including two external senior buildings office personnel from
other Universities and the College's acting Director of
buildings. The group stated that the post was
"administrative rather than supervisory" and warranted
administrative status (Grade 7 : U.C.C.; Administrative II :
T.C.D.) maximum points of scale being #32,000. The dispute
was subsequently the subject of a Rights Commissioner's
investigation. The Rights Commissioner found that there was
a problem with the salary/grade structure in the College. It
was his view that the worker should, as an interim measure,
be placed on the top of the Administrative Officer Scale,
effective from 1st January, 1992, and that "the Union should
seek a proper job evaluation and finally determine equity"
for the worker. The College appealed Recommendation no. ST
255/94 on the 8th of December, 1994, in accordance with
Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The
Court heard the appeal, in Galway, on the 1st of March, 1995.
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. A significant number of other employees in
administration also had claims during the 1980s for
upgrading. Regradings for this group were, in the
majority of cases authorised in 1993. In none of these
cases was assimilation onto a scale attaching to the new
evaluation grade, to a point higher than the first point
which would give an increase in salary.
2. The Rights Commissioner's Recommendation places the
worker in a position which is inequitable when compared
to his colleagues who have also been recently promoted
to Administrative Officer.
3. The total amount of retrospection involved, if the
Recommendation was to be implemented by the College,
would amount to approximately #20,000, which is
excessively high.
4. The Union sought that the worker be placed on a salary
equivalent to Statutory Lecturer which, in
administrative terms, equates to the College's Assistant
Secretary grade. This is an unreasonable claim.
5. The offer made to the worker on the basis of the
Assessors' report assimilated him onto the second point
of the Administrative Officer scale, giving him a salary
of #26,522 p.a., compared with his existing rate of
#25,989 p.a. (rates at time of offer). This offer
should not be considered only in terms of the immediate
increase without reference to the potential for his
further advancement. His possible progression is, in
current terms, now up to a salary level of #33,065.
6. The Union claimed that levels of workload and
responsibility of the worker have more than doubled
since his appointment. This is an arbitrary claim to
some extent, but the expansion of the College in terms
of physical size over the last twenty years has clearly
impacted on all posts within the Buildings Office.
Other grades of staff in the College can similarly argue
that the big expansion in student population, as well as
the increase in staff numbers, have caused their
workloads to increase considerably.
7. Salary comparisons cited by the Union in its submission
to the Rights Commissioner do not compare like with
like. It is also worth noting the current scales of pay
for Engineers in the County Council (details supplied).
The most senior grade of Engineer below County Engineer
and Deputy County Engineer is that of Senior Executive
Engineer with a current salary range of #26,830 up to
#31,925. The worker's potential to aspire currently to
a maximum of #33,065 places him in a relatively
advantaged position.
8. The College has already faced a claim from one of its
administrative employees who was upgraded to
Administrative Officer effective from 1st of March,
1992. This claim was also examined by a Rights
Commissioner, who supported the College, understanding
the ramifications of any concession in one case, since
retrospection or higher placement on the Administrative
Officer scale would very likely be claimed by others.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The original claim was lodged in 1982 and has been
pursued consistently since that date. The worker's
salary has remained at the maximum point of his scale of
pay since 1974 receiving no more than national awards
over that period of twenty years. This situation has
existed, despite clear evidence that his post was
growing both in terms of its duties and responsibilities
as well as its financial and professional benefit the to
College. The claim was based on the claimant's workload
and responsibilities and on comparison with other
universities.
2. The College successfully ignored the claim for many
years despite the fact that the claimant's manager,
himself a senior member of the College Management team
in 1985, had felt compelled to write to the then
Secretary Bursar notifying him of the 'reprehensible'
manner in which the worker was treated, despite the
excellence of his work.
3. Following the assessment in 1993, the merit of the
worker's claim was recognised by virtue of the offer of
Administrative Officer scale. The College, effectively,
offered an annual increase of only #522, with no mention
of retrospection, to an employee only part of whose work
had resulted in certified energy savings of #1.3m.
4. At the time of the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation
the results of an internal evaluation scheme, agreed
between SIPTU and the College, for those at or above
Administration Officer scale, were not to hand. They
now are, and a number of workers have moved to the
Assistant Secretary scale which has a maximum point of
#39,586. This was the original claim and remains the
objective of the worker concerned in this dispute.
DECISION:
The Court considered the written and oral submissions made by both
sides. The Court supports the Rights Commissioner's finding to
have an interim settlement pending a proper job evaluation. This
evaluation should take place without delay.
However, having considered all the circumstances of this
particular case, the Court is of the view that a more appropriate
interim salary-placing for the claimant would be the second point
of the Administrative Officer scale.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
4th April, 1995 Finbarr Flood
M.K./M.M. _______________
Deputy Chairman