FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1); INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT; 1990 PARTIES : ENTERPRISE IRELAND LIMITED - AND - MANUFACTURING, SCIENCE, FINANCE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Harmonisation of grades and conditions of employment
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union has submitted a claim for the harmonisation of grades and conditions of employment in Enterprise Ireland Ltd.
The company was established in July, 1998, following the merger of An Bord Trachtála, Forbairt and part of FÁS. While a substantive number of staff in this dispute are in Enterprise Ireland, a small number are also in Forfás and in the National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI). The employees are represented by both MSF and SIPTU.
Forfás is the employer of staff of the former Eolas, Industrial Development Authority and An Bord Trachtála. When NSAI was established as a separate statutory body in 1997, it was agreed to retain an employment link with Forfás for some of the staff transferring to the new statutory body.
The Union claims that while agreement was reached with SIPTU in relation to the grades it represented, management has failed to reach agreement with MSF in relation to the harmonisation of grades for staff which it represents.
The Company states that pay harmonisation issues were addressed and agreed to for grades represented by SIPTU in 1999. The professional and technical grades in Enterprise Ireland are those represented by MSF. The claim before the Court refers only to staff in these grades. While agreement was reached on a number of issues, there was no agreement regarding the Senior Scientific Officer (SSO) pay scale and also the retention of the Experimental Officer (E.O.) grade.
As no agreement was possible between the parties, the dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. Numerous conciliation conferences were held between September, 1998, and December, 1999, but no agreement was reached. The Industrial Relations Officer (IRO) put forward proposals to appoint two facilitators (1 for the Union & 1 for the Company) to try and resolve the dispute. Both sides agreed to the appointment
Agreed terms of reference were provided following consultation with Enterprise Ireland, the Department of Finance and MSF. The facilitators put forward their proposals to resolve the dispute, but these were subsequently rejected by the Department of Finance.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 13th of January, 2000, under Section 26 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on the 22nd of February, 2000.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union negotiated with the Company, using the industrial relations machinery available to it, to resolve the issues in dispute, but was not successful. The members have lost faith in management in relation to its ability to negotiate a satisfactory solution to this dispute.
2. Management concluded an agreement with SIPTU and its members in relation to the harmonisation of grades, but failed to conclude a similar agreement with MSF.
3. Failure by management to negotiate in a reasonable manner has led to members taking industrial action in relation to this claim.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Management has sought to identify areas where anomalies have existed in the grading structures, and have tried to address these within Public Sector pay policy.
2. In relation to grades represented by MSF, no harmonisation issues of significance relating to structures were identified. Any changes to remuneration could only be interpreted as being a straight pay increase.
3. Management has addressed other issues in relation to personal development and career opportunities which represents a significant improvement in terms and conditions for these staff.
4. Any deviation in the pay scales for the grades represented by this claim would have a significant impact on related grades in the wider Public Sector.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties. The history of this case is that, following the establishment of Enterprise Ireland, an exercise was undertaken involving two representative bodies in order to deal with the issue of harmonisation of grades.
Subsequently, one Union withdrew from the discussions and, following industrial action, was provided with a process by the Company, which included two facilitators, to address their claim. This process resulted in a deal being concluded in March, 1999.
The group of employees currently before the Court were, after lengthy discussions, provided with a similar process, but this was not brought to a conclusion. The facilitators in this case withdrew on the basis that they felt that they had brought the solution settlement as far as possible, but could go no further given the influence in the background of the Department of Finance and the parameters being set within the Enterprise Ireland operation.
It is the Court's view that this group currently before the Court has not had the full benefit of a similar exercise as provided for the other Union group. Given that some of the issues preventing a solution being reached have since been addressed, the Court recommends that:-
1. The issue of harmonisation of grading structures be referred back to the Labour Relations Commission.
2. Discussions to take place under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission between Enterprise Ireland and MSF with a view to reaching an agreement.
3. The parties should agree a package of proposals to be put to the claimants, and any outstanding issues not agreed can then be referred to the Court.
4. If the parties fail to reach agreement on a package at conciliation, then the matter can be referred to the Court for a definitive recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
4th April, 2000______________________
LW/CCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.