FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : CERT (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr McHenry Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Restoration of the differential between RTA/TA and Manager grades in Cert.
BACKGROUND:
2. Cert is a non commercial body involved in training. The current grading structure was established in 1981 and is based on the Fás grading structure.
The Manager grade was re-graded in 1991 following a review. This resulted in a greater differential between the Manager grade and the Regional Training Advisor and Training Advisor grade than had previously existed. In the early 1990’s, the differential between the grades was approximately £2,500 and in October, 2000 was approximately £12,000.
- The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of Regional Training Advisors and Training Advisors for the restoration of the differential which existed in the early 1990’s.
The Company states that the issue was dealt with in 1996 when an agreement was reached between the parties concerned to upgrade all serving Training Advisors to a new higher scale incorporating two long service increments personal to existing staff. This was accepted by the Union in 1997.
The Union states that while it recognises the value of the long service increments awarded, the original claim for re-grading was not concluded.
Local discussions could not resolve the issue. The dispute was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission held on the 29th of November, 2000. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 8th of February, 2001 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 3rd of April, 2001.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS :
3. 1. The workers concerned have co-operated fully with all new changes and restructuring that have taken place within Cert over the years.
2. While the workers recognise the value of the long service increments awarded under the 1996 agreement they are dissatisfied that the original claim for re-grading has not been concluded. They are now seeking the restoration of the differential which existed in the 1990’s between their grades and the Manager grade which they believe should not have been allowed to increase to such an extent.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS :
4. 1. The revised pay scales accepted by the Union in 1997 were in full and final settlement of the claim.
2. The Company's policies are dictated by the Department of Finance and the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation.
3. The claim cannot be conceded. It is a cost increasing claim and barred under the terms of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has given careful consideration to all aspects of this claim and is of the view that the claim for the restoration of the difference between the manager's grade and the RTA/TA grades was concluded by the deal brokered by the ICTU in 1997. This deal was accepted by the members on the 9th of June, 1997, and was paid retrospectively to October, 1996.
The Court recommends that the current claim before the Court should await the outcome of the Benchmarking Exercise and should be discussed in the context of the linkages with the Benchmarking categories examined.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
3rd May, 2001______________________
GB/CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.