FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES BOARD - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Carberry Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Regrading - (revenue collectors)
BACKGROUND:
2. The grade of revenue collector was established in Local Authorities in 1987 following the abolition outside of Dublin of the post of rate collector. The duties of the previous job were included in the new role.
- The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of its members employed as revenue collectors seeking the application of grade seven plus Local Authority mileage in respect of their duties and responsibilities or the application of the grade five plus 22.5% or the job evaluation of their posts in the absence of these. The current salary is grade four plus 22.5% for travelling. The claim is being progressed under Sustaining Progress as a major claim. Management rejects the claim on the basis that it is precluded under the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness.
- The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 2nd July, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 4th August, 2004, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. All sides accept that it would be to their benefit to have a new arrangement for revenue collection. This can be achieved through local negotiation given a framework. The Union is still prepared to go this route but requires an agreement at National level.
2. The Union is seeking that the National Collective Agreement currently in place for revenue collectors be upheld i.e no unilateral interference. A recommendation is also sought whereby in return for major change, the salary of grade VII plus Local Authority mileage or grade V plus 22.5% be applied to the revenue collectors nationally and that an agreement which would include a framework be concluded for this. The Union would be prepared to enter into negotiations with the Management under the auspices of a Conciliation Officer to achieve this.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The claim was first lodged in 2001 and is therefore covered by the terms of the PPF. The claim should have been lodged with the Benchmarking body, the agreed mechanism for dealing with such claims. The PPF provided for the establishment of a body to undertake an examination of the pay of public service employees in comparison to the private sector and make recommendations. Payments under the PPF have already been made and no mechanism exists to facilitate any further cost increasing claims.
2. Discussions on the rationalisation of the revenue collection function in Local Authorities would have involved a fundamental change in the way revenue is collected by Local Authorities and would have had significant implications for the revenue collectors, however, the Union chose to withdraw from these negotiations and pursue this regrading claim separately.
RECOMMENDATION:
In so far as the Unions claim is for a regrading of the Revenue Collector grade, it is contrary to the terms of Sustaining Progress and the Court cannot recommend its concession. The Union has, however, told the Court that its claim is based on a proposed major restructuring of the grade. The Management are also of the view that a restructuring could bring benefits to both sides but claim that the Union withdrew from earlier negotiations aimed at bringing that about.
The Court recommends that the parties resume negotiations with a view to restructuring the grade along the general lines already agreed in respect of certain Local Authorities in which local agreements have been concluded.
These negotiations should resume as soon as practicable and should conclude within a period not exceeding three months.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
12th August, 2004______________________
JO'CChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Joanne O'Connor, Court Secretary.