Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9686 Case Number: LCR15127 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: KILDARE COUNTY COUNCIL (Represented by THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT STAFF NEGOTIATIONS BOARD) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Rostering.
Recommendation:
The Court has fully considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their oral and written submissions.
The Court notes the view expressed by the Council that the
proposed rosters will provide a safe and adequate fire service.
Given all of the circumstances, the Court recommends that the
proposals of the Council be accepted and implemented.
The Court notes that loss of earnings as a consequence of the
above change is not before the Court for consideration.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9686 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR15127
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
KILDARE COUNTY COUNCIL
(REPRESENTED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT STAFF NEGOTIATIONS BOARD)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Rostering.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns the Council's proposal to amend
rostering in Naas Fire Station in line with the Newbridge
roster and to introduce rostering in Leixlip, Maynooth, Athy
and Monasterevin Fire Stations. There are twelve part-time
firemen in Naas and Newbridge, while each of the other
stations has a complement of nine. The Council's proposal
for the "twelve man" stations is to roster six on/six off and
to roster six on/three off in the "nine man" stations. The
Union opposes the proposal expressing concern regarding the
health and safety of the workers and possible delays in
response times.
Several meetings were held at local level but agreement could
not be reached. Conciliation conferences were held under the
auspices of the Labour Relations Commission on 1st February,
1996 and 16th February, 1996. Again agreement was not
reached and the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on
20th February, 1996 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Labour Court
investigated the dispute on 15th March, 1996.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. It is not normal practice in the retained fire service
for minor stations to be rostered. It is not
practicable or reasonable to expect all retained firemen
to be available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, as
many of them have outside jobs.
2. If only six men are called to an incident and even one
is delayed, it would result in a delayed response time
and a crew responding to an incident undermanned. By
this time, a fire which may initially have been minor in
nature (such as a chip pan fire) could have rapidly
spread and become a serious danger to the public and to
the firefighters.
3. The proposed rostering arrangements would result in a
loss of earnings for the workers, many of whom may then
leave the service. The Council could have difficulty in
recruiting and training new staff because of the lower
earning potential.
4. The proposed roster of six on/six off for the Naas Fire
Station (which is currently eight on/four off) is not
practical, as it is necessary to keep one person on
Station Duty in order to move the second fire tender
when necessary and to guard the cars and property of the
other firemen.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The current practice whereby eight firefighters in Naas,
and nine in other stations, turn out for minor fires is
uneconomical and unnecessary. The maximum crew for a
fire tender is six, therefore the staff who arrive late
remain in the station on full pay for the first hour of
the call.
2. The Council is under increasing pressure to deliver
improved services within ever tightening budgets. The
cost to the Council of one chimney fire is £315 in fire
fees alone, yet the householder is charged only £55.
The Council cannot afford to maintain the present
overmanning levels.
3. The introduction of the proposed rostering would not
affect the public's safety as it would apply only to
minor incidents which normally require one crew. All
members of the brigade are called out when an incident
requires a two pump response.
4. The 1973 National Agreement stipulated that the annual
retaining fee was to be doubled in return for
availability arrangements. The County Manager did not
implement rostering at that time. However, he paid the
allowance and retained the option to introduce rostering
at a later date.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has fully considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their oral and written submissions.
The Court notes the view expressed by the Council that the
proposed rosters will provide a safe and adequate fire service.
Given all of the circumstances, the Court recommends that the
proposals of the Council be accepted and implemented.
The Court notes that loss of earnings as a consequence of the
above change is not before the Court for consideration.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
4th April, 1996 Tom McGrath
D.G./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Ms. Dympna Greene, Court Secretary.