FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MAYO COUNTY COUNCIL (REPRESENTED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES' BOARD) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Call-out allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. The claim is on behalf of 30 waterworks and sewage caretakers, and is for the introduction of an on-call/call-out payment. The Union is seeking an annual retainer of €2,540 and €63.50 per call plus 3 hours at treble time (as a minimum). At present the workers who are called out for emergencies such as storm damage, flooding, ice on roads etc. are paid overtime rates. In May/June 2001, management proposed call-out payments (including the above mentioned) which would apply to all grades except the caretakers. The Council believes that conceding the claim could have national implications and also believes that it should be considered in the parallel benchmarking process for Local Authorities.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission (LRC) and a number of conciliation conferences took place. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 11th of March, 2002, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 6th of June, 2002, in Castlebar.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Council clearly stated in a letter to the industrial relations office (IRO) of the LRC that caretakers were eligible for call-out outside of their normal working hours. As such, they should be paid the same payment as other grades who receive the allowance.
2. The Union does not believe that conceding the claim would have national implications.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The caretakers are required to work 39 hours per week with a 7 day liability, and they are compensated for this in their wages.
2. The caretakers receive an allowance for weekend work of €29.93. When hours in excess of 39 hours are worked normal overtime rates apply.
3. The claim should be addressed at national level. Concession of it could lead to major repercussion across the Local Authority sector.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court accepts that the agreement concluded in July, 2001, and subsequently applied in neighbouring Local Authorities, did create an anomaly in the case of those associated with the present claim in relation to emergency call-out.
The Court notes that the question of allowances overall is to be considered within the parallel benchmarking process for Local Authorities. This process is to be completed in October, 2002.
The Court recommends that the parties await the outcome of that process. If the anomaly referred to is not resolved by the outcome of that process the matter may be referred back to the Court.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
14th June, 2002______________________
CO'N/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.