FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : DUCHAS - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Pay Scales
BACKGROUND:
2. The Office of Public Works (Duchas) employs approximately 80 permanent and 300 seasonal Guide/Information Officers at over 80 visitor sites throughout the Country. The Guides have a pay relationship with the Clerical Officer (CO) scale. The Union contends that the Guides have only had access to the CO scale points 1-7 and Head Guides have been in receipt of an inadequate weekly pensionable allowance of approximately €28. The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of it's Tour Guide and Head Guide members to gain full parity with the Clerical Officer scale in the Civil Service, it's marker grade, and in order to adequately recognise the evolving role and function of Head Guides, the Union is also seeking that the allowance be increased to €100 per week and that it be increased in line with future pay awards. Management contends that all Guide grades are non-established Civil Servants, whose pay is determined by the National Joint Industrial Council (NJIC) for State Employees.
- 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 26th January 2005, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 28th April 2005, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
3. 1. The current glass ceiling of the pay arrangements for Guides and Head Guides is no longer sustainable due to the ongoing evolution of the Guides and Head Guide roles. Having access to only 7 points of a 14 point scale is anomalous and creates other problems. Full access to the total CO scale along with a significant yet just increase in Head Guides weekly allowance is the only way to address the current inequities within the OPW in relation to the workers concerned. They are also at a disadvantage in that their opportunity for advancement is limited due to their status as industrial non-established Civil Servants. Therefore, adequate redress is required.
2. In discussions with Management over the years they seem to acknowledge merit in the Unions claim. However, the fact that discussion have taken a number of years would seem to suggest that they do not have the will to resolve the issues. The claim before the Court has been ongoing since 2001.
3. The cost of the claim is not that significant given that the Union is merely seeking access to additional increments in line with the rest of the Civil Service. As a result Management can plan for the additional costs which will be incurred. It is the Unions contention that there is no potential for knock-on claims given the relatively unique and anomalous situation the members find themselves in.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Guides have not been treated less favourably than their link grade, the Clerical Officer. They have received the same general round and special increases. There has been no fundamental change in the role of the Guide that would warrant further special pay increases.
2. Concession of this claim in isolation is likely to lead to 'follow on ' claims from other groups, which is precisely the type of leap-frogging exercise that Benchmarking was designed to preclude. The Public Service Benchmarking Body recommended that we had to "sever all previous pay links" and that Benchmarking " may not provide a basis for any follow on claims". In the same report the PSBB also stated clearly that "no benchmarked grade may receive a further increase".
3. We are still subject to the restrictions of Sustaining progress. SP provides that there will be "no cost increasing claims" save those provided for under SP and Benchmarking. Any concession of the claim would have immediate portents for approximately another eighty Guides employed in the National Parks and Wildlife Service of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government as they have identical pay rates. To prevent the inevitable future confusion between the employers and the Union, it would have been preferable that this claim be teased out at NJIC level.
RECOMMENDATION:
Given the assurances by management that the best way to process this claim is through the auspices of the NJIC for state industrial employees, it is the view of the Court that this is the correct forum for dealing with the problem. Given the lengthy history of the claim, it is the Court's view that this process should be completed within six months from the date of this recommendation.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
13th May 2005______________________
JO'CDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Joanne O'Connor, Court Secretary.