FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES BOARD (LGMSB) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERS OF IRELAND DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. National framework agreement.
BACKGROUND:
2. Discussions have been taken place since 1997 on a comprehensive modernisation of local management and staffing in accordance with government policy as set out in "Better Local Government - a Programme for Change" (BLG). The four core principles of the document are:-
- Enhancing local democracy
- Serving the customer better
- Developing efficiency
- Providing proper resources
The main objects of BLG are the strengthening of local democracy and the provision of better services to the public. To meet its objectives, it was decided by the government that a new programme based management structure would be introduced in the local authorities, and that staffing structures would be strengthened.
Management claims that it has been trying to implement the Government's objectives and to create a challenging and rewarding career for local authority staff, but has
been unable to secure Union agreement.
In the early stages there were direct local discussions between the parties followed, by a joint working group under an independent chairperson. However, these discussions collapsed after a few months in June, 1998.
Management then put forward its own framework document which set out their final proposals. Both IMPACT and IEI recommended acceptance while SIPTU recommended rejection of the document. Following a ballot of the members, management's proposals were accepted by IMPACT but rejected by both SIPTU and IEI. SIPTU is in disagreement with management on the following points:-
- The level playing pitch
- County/City Engineers
- Implementation
- Dublin and Cork Local Authorities
- Long term temporaries
- Pay
IEI claims that 90% of local authority engineers rejected management's proposals for "Better Local Government" (BLG). The Union is seeking an increase in engineering posts both at senior level and below senior level. Also, the Union claims that temporary engineers should now be offered permanent positions in the restructuring of the organisation.
The Union is also seeking a partnership approach in relation to the structures in Dublin and Cork authorities. In addition, engineers have always been entitled to "added years" in relation to their pension entitlements, which the Union asks the Court to recommend.
It is proposed under the restructuring programme to abolish the post of County/City Engineer which is the only engineering post to go in the proposed new set-up. A generous severance package should be offered to those who are dissatisfied and wish to leave the organisation.
IMPACT has indicated that, should changes to the Framework Document be recommended by the Court ,it would have to re-ballot its members in the matter. It also wants any improvements in the management side's offer as a result of a recommendation from the Court to have equal application to its members.
The Unions argue in relation to pay that the changes envisaged in "Better Local Government" have been accepted by all as being dramatic. It is the biggest reform of Local Authority Staffing Structures since the inception of local government in Ireland. The Unions claim that staff are being asked to accept a fundamental change from a 1979 agreement. It has always been accepted that radical restructuring constitutes a legitimate basis for a pay claim for those involved in it.
Management's position was that it had gone as far as it could in relation to pay and had nothing to offer in this area. It claims that seven of the ten documents concerned with the restructuring have been agreed to.
As no agreement was possible between the parties, the dispute was referred to the Conciliation Services of the Labour Relations Commission. Conciliation conferences were held on the 8th of February, 2000 and the 6th of March, 2000 but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 16th of March, 2000 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on the 20th of April, 2000.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The changes being proposed by management are dramatic. This constitutes a legitimate basis for a pay claim for those involved.
2. The proposal by management to abolish the post of County/City Engineer is unacceptable to the Unions.
3. There should be adequate compensation for those engineers who do not wish to remain as a consequence of the restructuring programme.
4. Professional staff who obtain additional qualifications should be compensated accordingly.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. On each occasion that progress has been made SIPTU has added further claims to the agenda, thereby making it difficult to bring the negotiations to a conclusion.
2. There will be a significant number of additional senior posts in most local authorities as a result of the restructuring programme.
3. Because of the change in their status, a severance package is on offer to County Engineers, Assistant Managers, and County Secretaries. The package on offer is the 1987 Public Services Severance Package.
4. Management has made it clear on many occasions that the current restructuring programme is not a pay or grading exercise.
RECOMMENDATION:
General
The disputes detailed by the parties before the Court arise in the context of the wish by the Authorities to create a more efficient and strengthened system of Local Government, following the new policy expressed by Government in 1996 in its document-Better Local Government - A Programme for Change.These plans were incorporated by the Local Government Management Services Board (LGMSB) in a Framework Document, which has been the subject of lengthy detailed discussions over a considerable period. Finally, at conciliation conferences earlier this year, issues of pay were raised, while management has held from the start that this reorganisation was not a pay or grading exercise.
The proposals have been accepted by majority of administrative grades, but rejected by majority of the professional grades, and by overall numbers.
A core aspect of the proposals is the elimination of the very long established dual structure, which involves two separate lines of authority for professional grades and others, in favour of a clear single hierarchy. While this results in changes in particular for senior engineer grades, there would also be over 400 new senior promotional posts, with entry by confirmed competition for existing employees in each Authority, as well as significant numbers of new supporting posts similarly applied for.
Recommendation
The Court has given careful consideration to the comprehensive written and oral submissions made by the parties to this dispute. The recommendations, which follow, are made having full regard to those submissions. They are intended to provide a final basis on which the parties can move forward in implementing the comprehensive modernisation of Local Government Management and Staffing, set out in the policy document- Better Local Government - A Programme for Change.
In relation to issues raised, the Court recommends as follows:
Acting Up
The Court recommends that any particulars of office for posts requiring professional qualifications should be amended so as to remove any impediment to the holders of such posts acting in any post not requiring such qualifications.
Fair Distribution of Acting Up Opportunities
The exercise by a Manager of his/her discretion to appoint an officer to act for a Director of Service, or to appoint a Deputy Manager, should be fair and equitable and should not distinguish between staff on the basis of their professional or administrative background.
Added Years
The question of professional added years for superannuation is one that affects the entire non-commercial public service. For that reason it would not be apropriate for the Court to recommend a change in the established arrangements in this case. The Court understands that this matter is currently under review centrally.
The Court acknowledges that there is potential for an anomaly to arise in the case of existing staff who presently have this benefit. If such person should transfer to nonprofessional posts in line with the new single hierarchy structure s/he could be perceived to lose out as against the normal present progression in the service. If that transpires to be the case in respect of any individual currently in service, it should be considered further by the parties at the time of the individual's retirement, if not accounted for as a result of the overall review referred to above.
Filling of Existing Vacancies for City and County Engineers.
The Court recommends that the new positions created should be filed in the manner proposed by management, rather than a first filing of vacant posts under LAC process, and their subsequent suppression.
Justification for Abolition of Posts of City County Engineer
The rational for the proposed new structure, as it affects engineers, is set out at paragraph 6.15 of the policy document-Better Local Government - A Programme for Change,in the following terms:
"Local Authorities employ a large number of professionally qualified and technical staff, mostly engineers. Engineers have a totally separate career path from recruitment level to county/city engineers and, with few exceptions, they have tended not to get involved in corporate management although many are, of course, managers of technical programs and of staff. Thus we have the so called dual structure. In many cases, the extreme features of this structure have been overcome by effective teamwork. Nonetheless, the existence of two different hierarchical structures, where, effectively, the engineering structure is separate from key management decisions, continues to be a feature in many local authorities. The creation of a program manager tier should offer an opportunity for engineers and, indeed, other professional/technical staff, to get involved in corporate management and should ensure that more of them will aspire to the senior management positions in local service.
In the view of the Court, this is a comprehensive statement of justification for the proposed re-organisation as it affects engineers. It should be accepted as such by the Unions.
Appointment to an Acceptable Directorate of Service
In the initial assignment of functions, Managers should consult with serving Assistant Managers and City/County Engineers and have due regard to the background and experience, and where possible to the preferences of the officers concerned.
Severance Package
Having regard to the terms of the current Public Service Severance Package, the Court can see no basis on which it should recommend that it be further improved, or extended to the holders of posts that are not to be suppressed.
Reporting Structure
It is noted that Document 3 of the agreed documents provides for the establishment of a working party and review group on implementation of the proposed change in the dual structure, including reporting structures. The terms of reference and composition of these groups should be agreed without further delay. They should then proceed to carry out their function concurrent with the implementation of the new structures, which should be implemented locally, by local agreements, on acceptance of the framework document incorporating these recommendations. Where the parties consider it necessary, an independent chairperson/facilitator should be appointed to assist the working party and review group in reaching agreement. In the absence of agreement on an independent chairperson/facilitator the Court will nominate a suitable person.
Appeals Procedure
The Court would direct the attention of the parties to the availability of the Labour Relations Commission, the Rights Commissioner Service and the Court, to address any individual or group grievances which may arise in the implementation of the new structures. This, in the Courts view, should be accepted as providing an adequate response to the points raised by the Unions.
Implications of New Developments Regarding Certain Proposed Posts
In so far as the Unions request further information on the details of proposed new posts not directly concerned with them, this should be made available by management. This should not, however,impede the implementation of the Better Government proposals.
Dublin and Cork Authorities
The negotiations in respect of the Dublin and Cork Authorities should proceed concurrent with those in all other authorities.
Long Term Temporaries
Management should implement the agreement reached on the filing of long-term temporary posts, immediately following acceptance of the Framework Document.
Pay
It is noted that Clause 6 of Annex 11 of the Pay Agreement associated with the Program for Prosperity and Fairness, provides that any outstanding claims in relation to pay, above those provided at Clause 4, will be subsumed within the benchmarking exercise established by the agreement and will be dealt with solely in that context. The Unions claim for an increase in pay, as presented is clearly precluded by that provision.
Moreover, the Court does not accept that the items relied on by the Unions in support of its claim (work outside office hours, on-call allowances, added qualifications, and private practise) are related in any way to the proposed restructuring. Should the Unions wish to pursue these individual matters further, they should do so within the parameters of the PPF.
Reimbursement of Professional Fees
Where membership of a professional body is a condition of employment in a particular post, the annual cost of membership should be reimbursed by the Local Authority.
Drafting of Final Document
The process of incorporating any changes necessitated by this Recommendation into the final document, together with what has already been agreed, should commence immediately following acceptance of this Recommendation. Should the parties require assistance in this process, they should request assistance of the Labour Relations Commission.
It should be clearly understood and accepted that this would be solely a technical exercise in line with the proposals put forward at paragraph 13.5 of the SIPTU submission to the Court. The proposals are as follows:
(1) The purpose of the exercise is to produce clarity.
(2) The substance of what has been agreed shall not be altered.
(3) Issues which have been agreed shall not be altered.
(4) New Issues shall not be raised.
Conclusion
In this Recommendation, the Court has endeavoured, as best it can, to address the concerns and apprehensions raised by the professional officers in relation to the impact of the proposed reorganisation of Local Government on their future careers. The Court acknowledges that, prior to this reference, significant progress has been made directly by all the parties concerned to facilitate the introduction of the Government's decisions, which have the support of all parties. This clearly underlines the commitment of professional and all other staff to participate positively in this process of reorganisation.
In the Court's view, these policy decisions should bring significant advantages to staff at all levels by providing a more coherent structure and enhanced opportunities for career advancement. They will also bring significant public benefit by providing improved local services and by strengthening local democracy. The Court believes that many of the apprehensions felt by the staff in the face of planned changes to a structure that has existed for generations will in practise not be realised, and that any drawbacks will be far outweighed by the gains that will accrue from the new system, including to both existing and future staff. The Court would urge all parties to move to the stage of local discussions as a matter of urgency.
On acceptance of the outcome of this final stage in process, the Court would urge all parties to continue to work in co-operation and in a spirit of partnership to implement and fully realise the benefits of the reorganisation programme, accepting whatever interim reporting arrangements are necessary to ensure that this proceeds without further delay.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
10th May, 2000______________________
LW/CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.