FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : WICKLOW CO. COUNCIL - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. 'Implementation of a nationally agreed Worksharing Scheme'
BACKGROUND:
2. In January, 2003, the Minister of Environment, Heritage & Local Government introduced a Local Authority Worksharing Scheme, which expanded the scope of the former job-sharing scheme by providing for a wider range of attendance. The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of it’s 200 members in relation to the issuing of guidelines by management relating to the Worksharing Scheme for Local Authorities. The Union contends that the guidelines both alter and interfere with a nationally agreed scheme by limiting it’s application, in that it limits the range of attendance patterns contained in the scheme by half.
- Management contends that the purpose of the guidelines was not to prevent staff from applying for any of the worksharing options available, but to give staff an indication of the types of attendance patterns considered to be most appropriate to Management having regard to the operational requirements of the Council and the need to preserve the quality of services being provided to the public.
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 2nd February, 2005, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 19th May, 2005, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
3. 1. The guidelines were circulated to staff without prior discussion with the Union. The guidelines severely limited the scope of the scheme by, firstly, limiting the range of attendance patterns contained within the scheme by half. Only applications for week on-week off, three day/two day and four day a week attendance patterns would be considered. Mornings only, afternoons only and a three day week were excluded. The second anomaly was the non-reference to the requirement that the assignment of alternative duties/post would be an option in the absence of a job share partner.
2. Management's position is contrary to the National Agreement in that while the Agreement is designed to expand the scope of attendance patterns, the guidelines issued by the County Council serve to reduce the scope of options available to staff.
3. A National Agreement cannot be altered at local level without reference to the national machinery that concluded the agreement. Should any of the parties at local level wish to do so, they must seek such a derogation through the National Joint Council/Local Government Management Services Board structure. The Union was, and is, consistent in the position that the guidelines be withdrawn and the full scheme be issued to staff.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. TheLocal Authority Worksharing Scheme, which came into effect on the 1st of January, 2003, was circulated to all staff on the 21st of January, 2003. The guidelines on the Local Authority Worksharing Scheme were issued by the Council in an effort to advise staff of the types of attendance patterns considered to be most appropriate to Management having regard to the operational requirements.
2. The guidelines are not an attempt to circumvent the National Worksharing Scheme but an effort to assist Council staff on the matter. All applications for worksharing arrangements have been processed in accordance with the scheme. Since January, 2001, the Council has received and processed a number of applications under the scheme, on an ongoing basis, indicating a high level of staff satisfaction with the scheme. The Union have been assured on a number of occasions that the guidelines will be kept under review and that any proposed amendments will be considered.
3. Wicklow County Council is fully committed to supporting a wide range of work/life balance options including the parental leave scheme, term-time leave scheme, career breaks etc. The Council is seeking to keep the guidelines in place and not to be withdrawn.
RECOMMENDATION:
The dispute relates to the guidelines produced by Wicklow County Council on the new expanded nationally agreed Local Authority Worksharing Scheme, Circular LG (P) 13/02. The court notes that amended guidelines were produced to address the Union's concerns that the County Council were limiting the scope of the Worksharing Schemes available to employees. The County Council submits that the guidelines are designed to be of assistance to staff who may wish to apply for the Worksharing Schemes. The Union contends that the guidelines severely limit the scope of the Worksharing Schemes. The Union requests the Court "to recommend the full application of the Worksharing Schemes to staff in Wicklow County Council".
The County Council assured the Court that applicants may apply for any of the schemes covered in Circular LG (P) 13/02 and that all members of staff have been circulated with the circular.
Circular LG (P) 13/02 states-:
- "While every effort should be made to facilitate staff who wish to avail of worksharing arrangements, managers must be satisfied that the granting of such arrangements in any particular case will not adversely affect the operational requirements of the local authority or the quality of the service provided to the public."
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
26th May, 2005______________________
JO'CDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Joanne O'Connor, Court Secretary.