FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : NATIONAL COLLEGE OF ART & DESIGN - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Maintenance of alignment of Buildings Officer post in NCAD with Buildings Maintenance Manager post in DIT
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of it's member, who is employed by the College as a Buildings officer, for the maintenance of an alignment of Buildings Officer/Post for pay purposes post in National College of Art and Design (NCAD) with the Building Maintenance Manager post in the Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT). Both posts were on a Grade VI scale. In 2004, the post of Buildings Maintenance Manager had been upgraded from Grade VI to Grade VII, with effect from January 2002. The Unions claim is to retain alignment for it's member.
Management rejects the claim stating that paragraph 19.6 of Sustaining Progress" provides that no cost-increasing claims by trade unions or employees for improvements in pay or conditions of employment, other than those provided for in clauses 19.18 and 19.19 will be made or processed during the currency of the agreement". The NCAD regards any upgrading arising from concession of this case as a cost-increasing claim which is precluded under this provision of the Agreement.
- 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 22nd November, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 16th February, 2005, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
3. 1.There was no understanding or agreement in the original documents that future up-grading of Buildings Maintenance Manager in DIT would break the establish link in NCAD.
2.Public Service Pay, cannot be used for the purpose of breaking established agreements. In 1998, Management entered into an agreement to re-align the claimant's pay with his equivalent in DIT.
3. Management's claim that the up-grades were in recognition for increased levels of responsibility and new facilities being built is untrue and even if it was, the claimant has committed to increased levels of responsibility/ new buildings and refurbishment of facilities.
4. The agreement must be honoured and the College or Department cannot be allowed to interpret Sustaining Progress for the purpose of breaking the agreement.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The post of Buildings officer in NCAD has no automatic entitlement to an upgrade achieved by any other grade, related or otherwise.
2. The Public Service Benchmarking Body's "recommendations on remuneration of the benchmarked grades have the effect of severing all previous pay links and establishing new absolute levels of pay of each of those grades". In this context the post benefited from an award recommended by the Public Sector Benchmarking Body. The award was commensurate with the increase recommended for Grade VI Local Authority posts and this established a new absolute level of pay for the post of Buildings Officer in NCAD.
3. In addition to Benchmarking award the post has also benefited to date from general increases provided under Sustaining Progress. These increases have been paid in return for co-operation with on-going change and modernisation reflecting the changing nature of the working environment including, inter alia, broader job descriptions.
4. There have been no changes in duties and responsibilities to warrant re-grading. The circumstances which led to the post of Buildings Maintenance Manager being re-graded in the DIT do not pertain in NCAD. The college is willing, however, to accept a proposal arising from the conciliation conference that an independent evaluation, limited to a direct comparison between the two jobs, be carried out.
RECOMMENDATION:
The claim before the Court is on behalf of the College's Building Officer for the maintenance of a pay alignment with the Buildings Maintenance Manager post in DIT. This alignment for pay purposes was established with effect from 1998 and confirmed in a letter dated 28th June 2000.
Having considered the views of the parties expressed in their oral and written submissions, the Court is of the view that the Public Service Benchmarking Report has altered this linkage, as it severed all previous pay links and established new absolute levels of pay for each of the grades covered by the report, therefore, it is not in a position to recommend concession of the claim.
However, the Court notes that Management of the College indicated that it is willing to have an independent evaluation of both posts carried out for the purposes of determining the comparative value of each job. The Court recommends that the parties should agree a suitably qualified person to carry out the evaluation and the exercise should be completed as quickly as possible. The evaluation should encompass any additional work involved with the planned capital investment in NCAD.
The parties may refer back to the Court in the event that there are any outstanding matters, following consideration of the completed exercise.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
28th February, 2005______________________
JO'CDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Joanne O'Connor, Court Secretary.