FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : EAST COAST AREA HEALTH BOARD - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr McHenry Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Filling of control positions in Townsend Street.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns the filling of Controller positions in Townsend Street with external applicants. The Union claims that these positions have, by agreement, always been filled by internal personnel employed as emergency medical technicians (EMTs) in the ambulance service.
Initially, the positions were advertised internally in September/October 1999. Seventeen workers applied and 7 were selected as suitable. However, only 2 of the 7 successful candidates actually took up the posts. The Union claims that the remaining 5 candidates declined the posts due to uncertainty on future pay rates. The Board then advertised externally and 6 candidates were considered suitable. They commenced training on the 4th of September, 2000.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relation Commission and a conciliation conference took place on the 17th of October, 2000. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 25th of October, 2000, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court Hearing took place on the 19th of December, 2000.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Management could have, and should have, created a panel from all the suitable candidates who applied internally. Two of the unsuccessful candidates had excellent experience in the operation of the control room.
2. Management accepted less qualified candidates when advertising externally, as all internal candidates had to be EMT qualified.
3. There is a long-standing agreement that the positions in question be filled internally. Management has broken that agreement.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Although it is the norm in the service that the positions are filled internally, there is no formal agreement in existence as the Union claims. Management acted in accordance with agreed procedures at all times.
2. A situation whereby a number of candidates refused appointment had never arisen before. There was no guarantee that a second internal competition would have been successful in filling the vacancies. The Board had to advertise externally.
3. The successful candidates have been in training since September, 2000, and must be placed in the control room as soon as possible as there are significant staffing difficulties there.
RECOMMENDATION:
While the Union has based its claim on an alleged breach by the Board of an agreement in relation to the filling of promotional vacancies, no such agreement in writing has been produced to the Court. It is, however, accepted that the established custom and practice is that such vacancies would, in the first instance, be advertised internally. In the present case, the Board did seek to fill the disputed posts internally. It was only when the majority of the successful candidates declined to take up the posts that the Board proceeded to seek external application. In these circumstances, the Board's actions cannot properly be characterised as a breach of agreement.
The Union told the Court that the reason why some of the unsuccessful internal candidates declined the offer was because they believed that the posts were being filled at a lower grade than that of existing post holders.
A claim for re-grading of E.M.C. posts from Grade III to grade IV was investigated by the Court on the 2nd of June, 2000. In LCR16564 the Court did not recommend concession of the claim at that time, but did recommend that further discussions take place between the parties. The Court understands that this Recommendation was accepted by all parties. To-date, agreement has not been reached to change the grading of the posts and Grade III remains the appropriate grade. It appears that those who declined the posts following the internal competition may not have properly understood this to be the position.
Having regard to all the circumstances of this case, the Court recommends that the Board should now re-offer E.M.C. posts to the five successful candidates arising from the internal competition at, Grade III, unless and until that grading is changed by agreement.
Taking account of the fact that over twelve months have passed since the internal competition was held, and of the reasonable pressure from the Union to have the vacancies filled so as to reduce the burden on their members who are manning the call centre with reduced numbers, the Court further recommends that no more than two weeks be allowed for the successful candidates to accept or decline the posts.
For the avoidance of doubt, the Court wishes to make clear that this Recommendation is not intended to impact in any way on the position of those appointed following the subsequent internal competition.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
19th January, 2001______________________
CON/CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.