LCR18490

In February 2000, IMPACT submitted a claim to the Board seeking restructuring and regradings on foot of the proposed transfer of functions to the Board and the expanded workload. The Board entered into discussions with the Union. An interim offer was made to the Union and accepted on an interim basis pending the completion and implementation of an independent review.

The review was awarded to the Irish Productivity Centre (IPC) who commenced their review in June 2000. The IPC reported in draft to all the parties, including the DoEHLG in early 2003, which both sides responded to in detail. The final report issued in late 2003 and recommended in favour of all the issues which are the subject of this claim.

During 2004 the Board entered into discussion with officials of the DoEHLG on implementing the Board’s proposal arising from the IPC Report. In addition, a joint Board / DoEHLG review group was set up to evaluate certain aspects of the Report and recommendations.

The dispute could not be resolved at local level and in December 2004, the Union referred the matter to the conciliation services of the Labour Relations Commission. In August 2005, the Department with the consent of the Department of Finance approved a package of measures which the Board put forward to the LRC. Several conciliation conferences took place on a number of occasions in 2005. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 9th December, 2005, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 8th February, 2006.

UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1.The proposed realignment for pay purposes of the Director of Planning and Deputy Planning Officers was submitted by the Board with its endorsement to the Department in late 2004.

2.The Board accepted that other posts of the Inspectorate be brought into line with Local Authority Professional Planning grades and set out a proposal to advance this in its initial submission to the Department in 2004.

3. The lack of a Local Government Professional Added Years Scheme, as recommended by the IPC Report, is a huge recruitment and retention barrier to the proper staffing of the Inspectorate.


COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The regrading for the Director of Planning and Deputy Planning Officers falls outside the provisions of Sustaining Progress.

2. The regrading of the Inspectorate and Local Authority Professional Planning grades runs counter to the general principle of applying civil service terms and conditions to the Board's staff.

3. The DoEHLG and the Department of Finance are not prepared to extend the Local Government Professional Added Years Scheme within the LGSS. It does not apply in any circumstances to the semi-State sector.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Court has considered the extensive submissions of the parties, as well as the lengthy history of the case.

In this context the Court notes:-

• • the background to, objectives and terms of reference of, the IPC review
  • the fact that, after the review had begun under the PPF, the board members agreed to be excluded from its scope and concluded a separate agreement with the Department.
  • the IPC Report's Recommendations.
  • correspondence between the ABP and the DoEHLG between April and June 2004 in which the APB recommended implementation of the report and, in response to a query from the Department insisted that the"Board is satisfied that its proposals arising from the IPC report are not in contravention of the Government's policy on public section numbers or the terms of the 'Sustaining Progress' agreement." (Letter dated 18th June 2004)