FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : GALWAY COUNTY ASSOCIATION (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Hearing arising from LRC 17574.
BACKGROUND:
2. The original dispute was heard before the Court on the 6th August, 2003 and Labour Court Recommendation LCR 17574 was issued on 4th September, 2003. The Union have now referred the dispute back to the Court by the Union on the basis that the substantive issue. i.e. “parity with Health Board Instructors, was not addressed in the National discussions as was claimed it would be by the Galway Association at the hearing in August 2003”.
The Union’s claim is based on July 1995 letter from the Chief Executive of the Association to IMPACT when he agreed to pay the rates, which applied, to Western Health Board Instructors.The Union on behalf of Instructors employed by the Galway County Association are seeking parity with the rate of pay paid to Instructors for the HSE Western Area.
As the matter was not resolved the dispute was referred by the Union back to the Labour Court on the 5th December, 2005 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the, 15th March, 2006.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3.1 The Union's position regarding the entitlement of Instructors employed by Galway Association to pay parity with Instructors employed by the Western Health Board now known as the HSE-West has not changed. The Union believes that the Instructors concerned are entitled to parity with their colleagues employed in the HSE-West as qualifications, duties and responsibilities of the Instructors are similar.
2. The Union believes it is unacceptable that the employer should attempt to depart from the agreement entered into in 1995 by the then Acting Chief Executive. In his letter to the Union, of a meeting with the Board of Directors it stated "it is agreed to implement parity with the pay scales for Western Health Board Instructors for Instructors employed by the Association with effect from 1st September, 1995.
3. The Union argues that in today's world of industrial relations an agreement remains an agreement until it is changed by agreement. The Union cannot accept any change to the agreement of 1995.
ASSOCIATION'S ARGUMENTS:
4.1 The Agreement accepted by the Unions in September 2004 addressed all issues relating to pay for Instructors in the intellectual disability sector and led to a rationalisation of a large number of different arrangements that existed in respect of such grades throughout the voluntary sector.
2. Any variations of this agreement would open the agreement to a flood of claims by other instructors throughout the Sector.
3. Significant pay increases were awarded toInstructors including those employed by the Galway County Association and linked to craft workers as part of this process.
4. This claim is outside the terms of Section 19 of the Sustaining Progress Agreement.
5. It is the policy of the Association to apply only Department of Health and Children approved consolidated salary scales once funding is provided or an adjustment and/or allocation has occurred.
RECOMMENDATION:
In Labour Court Recommendation No: 17574, the Court recommended that the claim for pay parity with Western Health Board Instructors should be set aside pending the outcome of the parallel benchmarking discussions on the pay arrangements to apply for instructors grades in the intellectual disability sector. The Court stated, “If the need arises, on completion of this process the Union has the right to refer this claim back to the Court.”
As the Union were dissatisfied that the process did not deal with the claim in the Galway County Association, the issue was referred back to the Court for a definitive recommendation.
The basis for the Union’s claim is based on the July 1995 letter from the Chief Executive of the Association to IMPACT when he agreed to pay the rates, which applied, to Western Health Board Instructors.
The scales, which applied to Instructors in the Western Health Board at the time, were the Department of Health and Children’s approved consolidated salary scales. However, since that time local arrangements have being put in place, which resulted in the Western Health Board departing from the Department’s scales.
Having considered the matter, the Court accepts the employer’s contention that the impact of the CEO’s letter was to put in place the Department’s approved consolidated salary scales at the time and that these continued to be applied.
This coupled with the outcome of the parallel benchmarking discussions where agreed national pay scales have now been established for instructor’s grades in the intellectual disability sector, means that the Court sees no basis to concede the claim.
Therefore, the Court rejects the Union’s claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
27th March, 2006______________________
JBDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.