FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND MAYNOOTH - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY IRISH FEDERATION OF UNIVERSITY TEACHERS) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Non-appointment to a Professorial post.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns a worker who is employed by the University since 1980. He was appointed in the grade of Senior Lecturer and is Head of the Centre for Applied Social Studies. He was also appointed Jean Monnet Professor of European Social Policy from 1994 to 2001. The Union claims that though the worker has the title of Professor he is remunerated at the Senior Lecturer scale. The Union claims that he should be remunerated at the Associate Professor scale. Management rejected the claim. The Union sought to refer the dispute to the Labour Relations Commission but the University objected to such a referral. On the 17th November, 2003 the Union referred a complaint to the Labour Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the 29th January, 2004.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The present salary scale on which the worker is placed is inappropriate taking into account the Jean Monnet consideration and the duties currently being discharged by him as Head of the Centre for Applied Social Studies. These have increased significantly since 1980.
2. The worker did not receive any additional monies as holder of the Jean Monnet Professorship, even though the situation obtaining elsewhere in the state is that persons awarded such professorships, who were not already in the professorial grade, were given a substantial allowance on top of Senior Lecturer salary in order to bring them up to the remuneration of at least Associate Professor.
3. The worker did not apply for the advertised Associate Professor posts between 1994 and 2003 because he considered that his case was special and should be dealt with ex quota.
4. The worker is a member of the University's Promotions Board, in relation to appointments to Associate Professor. Since a member cannot be of a lower grade than that with which a Promotion Board is concerned, this is further confirmation of his recognised professorial status.
UNIVERSITY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Jean Monnet Chair is a symbolic term corresponding to a full-time teaching post entirely devoted to the teaching of European integration. The European Commission documentation relating to the post makes no mention of any salary enhancement.
2. Prior to 2001 the worker did not make any claim for additional remuneration, or regrading in relation to the Jean Monnet Chair.
3. It was open to the worker on four occasions between 1994 and 2003 to apply for appointment to the Associate Professor grade. He failed to do so.
4. The nature of the worker's post was recognised in his original appointment to a Senior Lecturer post which represented a departure from the norm. He is adequately rewarded for the functions of his post.
5. In 2003 and 2004 the University has suffered a real reduction in its level of funding.
6. Concession of the claim will have repercussive effects.
7. The claim is cost increasing and precluded under the PPF and SP agreements.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the oral and written submissions of both parties. The Union has submitted a claim on behalf of the claimant for the awarding to him of the scale appropriate to his status and responsibilities, with the appropriate adjustment in remuneration. It is maintained that the status appropriate is either that of Professor or Associate Professor due to both his appointment to the Jean Monnet Chair from 1994 to 2001 and the duties currently being discharged by him as Head of the Centre for Applied Social Studies.
It is accepted by the College that a review of the position of the Centre for Applied Social Studies is required which may have the effect of changing the status of the Centre to one of a Department. Plans are in place for such a review to be carried out. The Court accepts that a decision on the status of the Centre, or the granting of a Professorship is properly the function of the Governing Authority of the University.
It is clear to the Court, that following his appointment to the Jean Monnet Chair in 1994 the University recognised his status as "Professor". Furthermore, the University appointed him to the Academic Council, the Governing Authority and the Promotions Board.
The Union are of the view that this is a special case, which should be dealt with ex quota.
Having reviewed the information supplied by both sides concerning the application of a professorial title with the appointment of the Jean Monnet Chair in other Universities, the Court accepts that there has been no uniform approach taken which would justify concession of the claim on those grounds alone.
Having considered all aspects of this claim the Court accepts that it was reasonable for the claimant to consider himself as having the status of 'Professor'given that he was addressed as'Professor' in correspondence, and given the implied recognition bestowed on him by the University through his appointment at professorial level to the various University bodies. In all the circumstances of this case and considering his long tenure at this status coupled with these appointments, the Court recommends that he should retain his current status of Professor on a personal to holder basis. The Court also recommends that, from the date of this recommendation, he should be placed on the Associate Professor pay scale in recognition of his personal status within the University.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
18th March, 2004______________________
todDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.