FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 20(2), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : NATIONAL GALLERY OF IRELAND - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Retrospective payments as per Joint Implementation Group Recommendation.
BACKGROUND:
2. In January 2005 the Joint Implementation Group (JIG) issued a recommendation in respect of Gallery attendants employed at the National Gallery and recommended that both the Union and the National Gallery should immediately confirm in writing their full acceptance of Labour Court Recommendations LCR 17612 and LCR 17923.
The claim could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. The Industrial Relations Officer met with the parties and with their approval developed a proposal which would allow for 60% of the potential retrospective payment to be awarded to the attendants. The proposals were rejected by the workers who are seeking full retrospective payments.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 30th September, 2005 in accordance with Section 20(2) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and both parties agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 30th November, 2005.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3.1 The Union wish to state that they or their representatives have done nothing wrong in the matter in which we represented the workers. The workers have been fully compliant and have always accepted the Labour Court Recommendations LCR17923.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4.1 The workers have sought to have improvements in pay scales which form part of an Agreement concluded on 19th December, 2001 implemented as soon as possible, but they have also attempted to impede the implementations of any proposed and agreed changes in work practices.
2. The Union refused to accept change in work practices in 2002 when the review was issued. The also refused to accept LRC 17612 in September 2003 and the agreed implementation plan despite the fact that new pay scales were implemented on 1st January 2004.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having regard to the history and circumstances of this case the Court is satisfied that the Management of the Gallery were justified in withholding the increases at issue.
It is, however, noted that the Gallery are prepared to accept the proposal formulated by the IRO and conveyed to the parties in his letter of 30th August, 2005. Notwithstanding the Union's rejection of this proposal the Court cannot see any rational basis upon which it could recommend any alteration in that proposal.
Accordingly the Court recommends that the proposal contained in the IRO's letter of 30th August, 2005 be accepted.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
12th December, 2005______________________
JBChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.