FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : IARNROD EIREANN - AND - TRANSPORT SALARIED STAFFS' ASSOCIATION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. 1. Payment of Zoning Allowance. 2. Regrading. 3. Payment of Tunnel Allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. In May, 2001, the Company and the Union concluded the Change Agreement in respect of Supervisors/Inspectors in the Permanent Way Section. The dispute before the Court relates to issues which remain unresolved in respect of four Permanent Way Inspectors as follows:
Zoning Allowance.
Operative staff, supervised by Permanent Way Supervisors/ Inspectors, are paid a zoning allowance if they work away from base locations. The Union is claiming the application of the allowance to the Supervisors/ Inspectors where they satisfy the qualifying conditions.
Regrading of two Inspectors from Class B/C to D.
The Union claims that an undertaking was given by Management at discussions that its claim for the regrading of two Inspectors, whose applications were submitted to the Company, would be considered by the appropriate committee. The Union claims that the Company has reneged on the undertaking.
The claims were rejected by the Company. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held but agreement was not reached. On the 19th February, 2003, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court by the Labour Relations Commission in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Court hearing was held on the 24th April, 2003.
Tunnel Allowance.
Operative staff are paid an allowance of 20% when working in tunnels but it does not apply to the Supervisors/Inspectors. The Union's claim is for payment of the allowance to the Supervisors/Inspectors where they satisfy the qualifying conditions.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.Zoning Allowance.
The purpose of this allowance is to ensure that travel time attracts payment, where work requires travel across large sections of the rail network. The Company has refused to make this payment available to staff on the Supervisory grade. Yet they are required to travel to out based locations within their working time despite the fact that, in some instances, for safety reasons, the operatives in question will not operate the machines without a supervisor being present, and will demand that an acting supervisor be appointed. The Union is aware of at least six acting supervisors who have retained this allowance while acting as supervisors.
2. The Company has conceded this allowance to one Supervisor, now retired.
3.Regrading.
The two Supervisors concerned have long standing grading claims on which the Company has failed to either concede or reject. It is a source of great frustration to the claimants that their applications have been ignored. The Company should concede the regradings or give a detailed explanation of the rationale for not conceding them.
4.Tunnel Allowance.
The Tunnel Allowance arises from LCR 6493 in relation to rail operatives.The Company has refused to pay this allowance to Supervisors who manage the operative staff and who, in so doing, endure the same conditions for which the Court has already recommended that compensation is appropriate.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.Zoning Allowance.
The Permanent Way Supervisors change proposals, agreed between the parties in May, 2001, made no reference to the payment of the allowance to the Supervisors. The Company, in reliance on the provisions in respect of flexibilities and changes in work practices as set out in the agreement, does not see that the allowance is appropriate to Supervisors.
2.Regrading.
(i) Worker A.
This claim is based on the increase in track laying brought about by the Railway Safety Programme 1999-2003. While Management accepts that the increased productivity has led to a higher activity level for all concerned the fundamental responsibilities of the worker have not changed.
(ii)Worker B.
The worker's claim is based upon changes which have occurred in his duties from his appointment as a Class C Technical Inspector in 1978. His responsibilities changed in the period 1978-2003 to include supervision of staff associated with the operation and maintenance of on-track plant and small power plant. The changes which have occurred since 1978 are a natural evolution, due to the changing business needs of the railway, and do not warrant a regrading.
3.Tunnel Allowance.
The Union's claim is based upon parity of conditions with Permanent Way operative staff in Cork, who receive a 20% increase in their hourly rate of pay for time spent working in Cork tunnel. This allowance is paid as a result of a Labour Court recommendation of 1981(LCR6493), and covers only plate layers and gangers.
4. For the past 22 years Supervisors have carried out their duties in the Cork area without reference to this recommendation
5. Grade D is a grade reserved for Permanent Way Inspectors engaged on safety critical track maintenance on a twenty four hour seven day basis on heavily tracked routes . It is not appropriate that Class D should be applied in either case.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the three claims before it in respect of Permanent Way Supervisors / Inspectors and recommends as follows :-
Zoning Allowance
The Union sought the application of the zoning allowance as paid to operative staff for
travel time when working away from base location. The Court notes The Change
Agreement for Permanent Way Supervisors / Inspectors reached in May, 2001, which
introduced new working arrangements for supervisors. Paragraph 2.2 of that
agreement calls on Supervisors / Inspectors to : -
- plan their attendance time with management.
- concentrate their efforts on important activities
- make effective use of their time
- make astute and effective use of their Gangers time as an alternative to their own attendance on works.
The Court recommends that in the context of these commitments and the overall emphasis on flexibility within the agreement, if there are occasions when supervisors meet the conditions specified for the payment of the zoning allowance, then the allowance should apply to the claimants involved in this claim.
Regrading of Two Per Way Inspectors
The Court notes that the two Inspectors, who are the subject of this claim, have submitted applications under the Company's regrading policy for regrading from Class B/C to Class D. This process had been initiated when these claims were referred to the Court. The Court is of the view that the appropriate forum for consideration of this claim is through the agreed Company procedures. The Court recommends that this process should not meet with any further delays and their claims should be dealt with as quickly as possible. If at the expiry of this process the issue remains unresolved it may be referred back to the Court.
Tunnel Allowance
Permanent Way Supervisors/Inspectors sought application of a tunnel allowance as paid to operatives, following a Labour Court recommendation made in 1981. Having considered the claim the Court is of the view that the payment of this allowance to Permanent Way Supervisors/Inspectors is not appropriate. Therefore, the Court does not recommend concession of this claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
8th May,2003______________________
TODCaroline Jenkinson
Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.