FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : CENTRAL BANK OF IRELAND - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Introduction of Benchmarking for service staff grades.
BACKGROUND:
2. The claim concerns security staff, catering and cleaning staff, currency assistants, and porters. The Union's claim is for the introduction of a Benchmarking process to examine the role and remuneration of these grades and that such a process would allow for future reviews in line with other service grades in the Public Service. An agreement reached in respect of clerical and administrative staff included a Benchmarking exercise which has since been carried out. The Bank rejected the Union's claim. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held but agreement was not reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 19th May, 2003 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Court hearing was held on the1st August, 2003.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. It is unsustainable and divisive for the Bank to treat the service staff grades as being of less value and not deserving of equitable and fair treatment with the clerical/administrative grades.
2. Clerical /administrative grades have benefited substantially under the Bank's Benchmarking exercise while service staff have fallen further behind these grades and comparable grades in the Commercial Financial Services sector.
3. The Union acknowledges that pay increases were received by the claimants but these were in respect of changes in work practices. The Union is not precluded from seeking a Benchmarking exercise on behalf of service grades. Clerical /administrative staff received increases from similar agreements yet also benefited from Benchmarking.
4. The Union is seeking the same treatment for the claimants as that afforded to other service grades in the Public Service.
5. Commitment to Benchmarking is a fundamental part of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness(PPF) and Sustaining Progress(SP) Agreements and, therefore, the claim is not precluded under these agreements.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 The Bank concluded agreements with all staff groups covering such areas as increased productivity, new work practices etc., which yielded substantial pay awards over and above National Agreements.
2. The Benchmarking awards to clerical/administrative grades equate to awards made to the claimant group across the employment generally. The awards arise from collective agreements that were concluded with the clerical/administrative staff in 2000 which brought the cycle of "special" pay awards to a conclusion.
3. Concession of the claim would commence a new round of special pay awards and create a climate of pay instability as other groups would feel justified in making similar claims.
4. The claim is cost increasing and precluded under the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness and Sustaining Progress agreements.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties and the information subsequently supplied by the employer in relation to average increases paid to staff in recent years.
Having considered the information the Court is not satisfied that this Group is a pay round behind the Clerical, Administrative and Professional staff, and is conscious that to recommend concession of the claim would start a new round of negotiations.
However, the Court accepts that there appears to be a significant difference in the level of settlements made for the Clerical, Administrative and Professional staff as against the increase given to the claimants.
The Court having considered all aspects of this case recommends that in the next round of negotiations, benchmarking be made available to this group, and that the negotiations should take into account the imbalance that appears to have been created in these negotiations.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
29th August, 2003______________________
TODChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.