FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : KIMMAGE, WALKINSTOWN, CRUMLIN & DRIMNAGH AREA PARTNERSHIP KILRUSH AMENITY TRUST LTD DONEGAL LOCAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Pay - Non Payment Of Benchmarking
BACKGROUND:
2. The claim before the Court is for the non - payment of Benchmarking increases. Since 1996 the three companies have operated a Job Initiative Programme in their respective areas. Team Leaders/Assistant Team Leaders are employed by the companies to carry out supervisory roles and their salaries were funded by FÁS. The Team Leaders were paid at a rate equivalent to Community Employment Supervisors. This was to remain the case until 2005, when Benchmarking awards were applied to Community Employment Supervisors salaries. In March and April 2005 the Union, on behalf of the Team Leaders/Assistant Team Leaders, made a formal representation to FÁS to have Benchmarking applied to their salary scales. In May 2005 FÁS responded to the Union to advise that they had raised the issue with the Department of Finance. The issue remained unresolved.
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 22nd January, 2007 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
Labour Court Hearings took place on 23rd May and 8th June 2007.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 Benchmarking awards, which were applied to Community Employment Supervisors scales, should be applied to the Team Leaders/Assistant Team Leaders Salary Scale in order to restore the pay linkage that previously existed.
2 All retrospective payments due to Team Leaders/Assistant Team Leaders should be paid from the due date.
3 The current position in relation to pay scales for Team Leaders/Assistant Team Leaders is unacceptable. They are currently the only employees of this sector who have not received the Benchmarking award and if this is not corrected could lead to difficulty in this sector.
COMPANIES ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 In principle, the companies have no objection to the Benchmarking claim. However, the funding to cover the salaries of Team Leaders/Assistant Team Leaders comes from FÁS and no funding has been forthcoming from them.
2 The companies do not have the resources to pay any retrospective payments due to staff. If any company were to do so it could cause the liquidation of that company.
3 The companies have used other funding to top up Team Leaders/Assistant Team Leaders pay but this is not sustainable and retrospective payments due could not be covered this way.
RECOMMENDATION:
The claim before the Court concerns the non-payment of the terms of Benchmarking to Job Initiative Team Leaders/Assistant Team Leaders employed by the management organisations. These organisations are funded by FÁS. The Union sought the increases and retrospection due from the appropriate dates.
Management indicated to the Court that it had insufficient funds available to pay the terms of Benchmarking in full. Some of the organisations have paid the Benchmarking increases, but have faced extreme difficulty in doing so. However, none of the organisations were in a position to pay the retrospective elements due. Management pointed out to the Court the seriousness of the funding situation and stated that if it became necessary to pay the full terms of Benchmarking it would lead to the immediate liquidation of the organisation.
The Court has considered the views of the parties expressed in their oral and written submissions. The Union submitted a circular from FÁS to a number of organisations from the Manager of the Community Services Unit, dated 20th January 2000 and headed “Information Note re Job Initiative Schemes” which stated:
- “Team Leaders Salary
The CE Supervisors Scale should be used to decide on the Team Leaders Salary”. (salary scale quoted in circular)
“ It is the responsibility of the Managing Agent to decide the point on the scale which should apply to the Team Leader.”
It also submitted a letter dated 21st June 2002 from FÁS to one of the organisations, stating:
- “Persons selected for the post of Team Leader will be paid a rate that is at least equivalent to the Community Employment Supervisor rate. This rate will be incremental over four years and FÁS will increase funding to you accordingly.”
- “All Team Leaders pay will be determined by the Managing Agent and will at a minimum be equivalent to Point 1 on the CE Supervisor Scale (for 15 participants/developmental). In subsequent years budget allocation to the Managing Agent for Team Leaders will accommodate progression up the scale to the maximum allowed.”
Taking all of the points raised by the parties, the Court recommends that the JI Team Leaders should receive the appropriate Benchmarking payments under similar terms as applied to the CE Supervisors. The Court recommends that the employer organisations should seek to obtain the necessary funding to meet the costs associated with the claim in accordance with the commitments given by FÁS.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
20th June, 2007______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.