Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95581 Case Number: LCR15006 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: FORBAIRT - and - MANUFACTURING, SCIENCE, FINANCE |
Grading of six Regional Managers.
Recommendation:
It is clear from the evidence presented to the Court that, despite
the perceptions held by the claimants that their case for
promotion would be progressed, no action was taken to progress
this case.
It is equally clear that, even if the case had been put forward,
there is no guarantee that it would have been successful.
In the merging of the two organisations, there is obviously a
requirement to deal sensitively with individuals' fears and
concerns, particularly in relation to status.
The Court, therefore, while rejecting the case for upgrading on
the basis of the case before it, recommends that Forbairt
Management agree to the claimants retaining the title of Regional
Manager, and that discussions be held between the parties on work
duties, taking into account the sensitivity of the situation.
Division: Mr Flood Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95581 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR15006
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
FORBAIRT
AND
MANUFACTURING, SCIENCE, FINANCE
SUBJECT:
Grading of six Regional Managers.
BACKGROUND:
The Union is seeking that Forbairt should promote six staff
members from the grade of Regional Manager (RM)/Senior
Scientific Officer (SSO) to that of Principal Scientific
Officer (PSO)/Regional Director. The claim was first lodged
with EOLAS shortly before the dissolution of that agency.
When EOLAS ceased to exist, staff were transferred to Forfas
and then to Forbairt with the implementation of the
Industrial Development Act of 1993. There were originally
seven staff members involved in the dispute in EOLAS but one
member was successful in an open competition for the post of
Regional Director.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission
and a conciliation conference took place on 11th April, 1995.
No agreement was reached and the dispute was referred to the
Labour Court on 5th October, 1995, in accordance with Section
26(1), Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court
hearing took place on 31st October, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
1. It was recognised by senior management in EOLAS that the six
RMs concerned were operating on a level which was higher than
that at which EOLAS could accommodate them. During meetings
with the Assistant Chief Executive (ACE) and Chief Executive
(CE) of EOLAS in November/December, 1993, it was agreed that
the RMs should be upgraded to the post of PSO.
Forbairt was established in January 1994 under the Industrial
Development Act 1993. Part III Section 16 states:-
"All rights and liabilities of a dissolved body arising
by virtue of any contract, or commitment (expressed or
implied) entered into by that body before the
establishment day shall on that day stand transferred to
Forfas."
The commitment to upgrade the six RMs has not been honoured.
2. On 17th December, 1993, the RMs received a directive from the
Personnel Manager in EOLAS that they were no longer to use
their title of Regional Manager. Instead, they were to use
the title Regional Representative. The directive also
applied to RMs in the IDA. The RMs in the IDA, however,
continued to use the title Regional Manager.
3. On 23rd February, 1994, Forfas announced that Forbairt would
be appointing Regional Directors and the IDA would be
appointing RMs in regions outside of Dublin. Prior to the
establishment of Forfas there were fifteen RMs - seven in
EOLAS and eight in the IDA. Six of the former IDA RMs were
appointed whereas only one EOLAS RM was appointed and
promoted to the position of PSO/Regional Director.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The system in place in the former EOLAS is that consideration
for re-grading was given arising out of the Annual Review.
Only one of the six staff concerned was mentioned in the 1994
Annual Review for a positive recommendation, a merit payment
of £1,000. Had the posts been deemed to be PSO grade, it
would have been necessary to hold an open competition. The
Union is aware of this.
2. The staff concerned are in receipt of all the same benefits
as they had in the former EOLAS. Their job description is
substantially the same. Management must assign staff to
carry out duties appropriate to their grading. The duties of
the 6 workers have been modified to represent their positions
in the current regional offices.
3. The first seven posts of Regional Director were competed for
in 1994. One of the original seven EOLAS RMs was successful
in the competition. The other six positions were filled by
former members of EOLAS, and of IDA staff. The staff
concerned now have greater opportunities for promotion in
Forbairt than they had in EOLAS.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is clear from the evidence presented to the Court that, despite
the perceptions held by the claimants that their case for
promotion would be progressed, no action was taken to progress
this case.
It is equally clear that, even if the case had been put forward,
there is no guarantee that it would have been successful.
In the merging of the two organisations, there is obviously a
requirement to deal sensitively with individuals' fears and
concerns, particularly in relation to status.
The Court, therefore, while rejecting the case for upgrading on
the basis of the case before it, recommends that Forbairt
Management agree to the claimants retaining the title of Regional
Manager, and that discussions be held between the parties on work
duties, taking into account the sensitivity of the situation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
8th December, 1995 Finbarr Flood
C.O.N./A.K. ---------------
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.