FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BROTHERS OF CHARITY (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Upgrading Claim
BACKGROUND:
2. It is the Union's claim that the workers concerned are on the wrong pay scale given the duties they carry out. The Workers are paid as Workshop Instructors. They are on a red-circled scale of pay which equates to a craft rate plus 25%. The Union argues that they should be on the Workshop Manager rate of pay as each of the workers carries out all or some of the duties of that grade. The Company's position is that the workers are correctly graded and that if any of them were to leave their employment tomorrow, they would be replaced by a person on the new lower scale of pay for Workshop Instructors.
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 21st November, 2007 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 12th March, 2008.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 There are significant similarities between the job description for Workshop Manager and the actual duties carried out by the workers concerned. Many of these similar duties carried out are not stated in the job description of Workshop Instructor.
2 All the workers have staff reporting to them and have managerial duties.
3 The similarities between the Job descriptions and the duties carried out that are not included in the currently held job description warrant an independent assessment of the job roles being undertaken.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 The scales in operation are those as agreed through the Labour Relations Commission in 2004. The Union were a party to these discussions and accepted the terms of this national agreement.
2 Should any of the workers leave and be replaced, their existing replacement rate is much lower than their current red-circled rate of pay.
3 The Company rejects the claim for an independent evaluation of the grades. A national process is available through parallel benchmarking.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the written and oral submissions of the parties and is not in a position to determine whether the duties and responsibilities of the red-circled Craft Supervisors are comparable with those (as outlined in the Job Description) of a Workshop Manager and consequently recommends in favour of the Union’s claim to have an assessment carried out by an independent consultant.
This exercise should be conducted as expeditiously as possible.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
25th April, 2008______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.