FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : TIVOLI TRAINING CENTRE - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioners Recommendation R-031004-Ir-04/MMG.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Tivoli Training Centre is a Community Training Centre (CTC) providing training, education and personal development for young people either involved in or at risk of offending in the community. The Department of Justice (DoJ) through the Probation & Welfare Service fund the centre. The local VEC provide support by allocating teaching hours and FÁS pay the trainee’s wages.
There are no distinct salary scales designated for the Centres. The original Instructors salary scale, dating back to 1984, was a FÁS Grade 10 scale.
The worker concerned has been employed as an Instructor for 18 years. Following discussions at the Labour Relations Commission in 2000 his rate of pay was established as being linked to the FÁS Community Workshop Scales.
In 2004 it was contended that the worker had again fallen behind on the pay scales and he was also seeking the application of Benchmarking awards.
The issues were referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. He concluded that the worker“had enjoyed the fruits of a salaryscale throughout his employment.”He recommended that the parties meet to“commence meaningful discussions on how the benchmarking assessment can be completed….”
The Employer appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on the 17th June, 2005, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 8th March, 2006.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The decision to pay the FÁS CTW salary scales was made at a time when our funding was capable of absorbing such an increase.
2.The Directors have made representations to the Probation & Welfare Service in order to increase our annual funding without success to date.
3. Any concession of claims such as this are just not realistic for an organisation such as ours which is in a parlous financial state due to under-funding.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In October 2000 a letter was issued by the Board of Directors stating that Tivoli Instructors would be placed on the FÁS Community Training Workshop salary scales.
2. The Rights Commissioner investigation and recommendation of March 2005 acknowledged the linkage with the FÁS Community Training Workshop salary scales.
3. The Union are willing and available to meet with the Management of the Training Centre to discuss how this matter can be progressed.
DECISION:
The dispute before the Court concerns the maintenance of the FÁS Community Workshop Salary scale for the claimant employed as an Instructor with the Centre. This pay linkage was agreed and established in 2000. That linkage has been broken, without agreement and the Union are seeking to have it re-established and retrospective payments applied.
The Centre submitted to the Court that it had insufficient resources to pay the increases due to maintain that linkage. It stated that the Centre is operating at a deficit and would be in danger of reckless trading if it conceded the claim. The Union do not dispute the Centre's financial situation.
In an effort to address the Rights Commissioner's recommendation, the funding authority for the Centre, the Probation and Welfare Service indicated its intention in June 2005, to refer the issue to the Department of Finance. No response has yet been received.
Having considered the views of the parties expressed in their oral and written submissions, the Court would concur with the findings of the Rights Commissioner in that both parties should actively engage to bring resolution to the issues. Having regard to the previous linkage priority must be given in those discussions to obtaining an urgent response from the Department of Finance in order to ensure that the Instructor is remunerated appropriately.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
30th March, 2006______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.