FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : WESTMEATH COUNTY COUNCIL & ATHLONE TOWN COUNCIL (REPRESENTED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES BOARD) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Carberry Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Contracting out of refuse service.
BACKGROUND:
2. The two Councils are currently operating a refuse collection service. The Westmeath County Council operates three refuse trucks and Athlone Town Council operates one truck. Each truck is manned by one driver and two collectors.
The dispute before the Court concerns the right of management to contract out the refuse service in both councils in accordance with the Analogue Agreement of 1997. The Councils wish to contract out the refuse collection service and a kerbside recycling service. The Union want the Councils to continue providing the refuse collection service. In the event that the Councils do contract out the service the Union want the Transfer of Undertaking Regulations to apply. This would enable existing employees to transfer to the contractor on existing terms and conditions of employment.
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 5th of March, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 29th of April, 2004.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The service as presently structured is a valuable source of income for both Councils.
2. The Union does not accept the right of management to contract out an existing service.
3. The Union contend that if the service is contracted out then a transfer of undertakings situation exists.
4.If work is taken away job losses may ensue and would have implications for other areas of the Council.
COUNCILS' ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Councils have consulted with the Union regarding the proposed introduction of workplace-related initiatives.
2. Management do have a right to introduce changes following consultation.
3.All local authorities have traditionally provided services by the use of a combination of direct labour and contractors. The use of contractors in the delivery of refuse collection services is long established.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issue before the Court concerns the right of management to contract out the refuse service in both Councils in accordance with the Analogue Agreement of 1997. While the Union accept that management have a right to avail of the use of contractors for any new or expansion of the refuse service, it disputes management's right to contract out the existing service and contends that the current status of the refuse service should apply, as per the Parallel Benchmarking report viz "the current practice of employing direct labour and contractors will continue, so as to ensure value for money and effective delivery of service".
Having considered the positions of both sides the Court accepts that the Analogue Agreement of 1997 allows for the delivery of a service by the Councils in a manner different from that traditionally operated and if the service can be delivered in a more effective manner by the use of contractors then this is enshrined in the terms of the Parallel Benchmarking report.
Accordingly, the Court accepts that the Councils decision to contract out the refuse service in the current circumstances is covered by the provisions of the 1997 Agreement. However, the Court understands the Union's fear concerning the loss of jobs and the possible future implications of accepting the principle of contracting out of an existing service. This fear has given rise to reluctance on the Union's part to enter into discussions on this issue.
The Court is of the view that insufficient discussion has taken place on the implications of contracting out the refuse service and recommends that immediate discussions should take place between the parties, which should be completed within three weeks, specifically in relation to the following:-
- possibility/feasibility of retaining those people currently employed in refuse collection either by the councils or by the contractor,
- redeployment of refuse collection staff,
- protection of jobs into the future,
- loss of overtime compensation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
12th May, 2004______________________
MG/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.