FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN - AND - BUILDING AND ALLIED TRADES UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Review of the Area Executive Craftsmen's position with a view to restoring their historic differentials with Craft Grades.
BACKGROUND:
2. The post of Area Executive Craftsmen (AEC) was created in 1993 to meet the multi-skilling needs of Trinity College and was a promotional outlet for craft workers. At that time their pay scale was linked to EO/HEO public service pay scales. Over the intervening years the pay differential has eroded in relation to the craft workers' pay scales and in 2001 an opportunity arose to reconsider the question of linkage but due to Union representation and difficulties no formal position was adopted by the group of Unions involved. In 2006 all the AECs joined BATU leading to the instigation of the current claim to re-establish the original differential.
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 12th September, 2007, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 7th December, 2007
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The AECs have suffered a significant erosion of their differential above craft workers' pay due to their linkage with EO/HEO public pay scales. Originally the differential was 14% in 1993, it had dropped to only 1.8% during 2006.
2. Although the duties of AECs have grown both in terms of the number of buildings they cover and the complexity of the work involved, the position can no longer be considered as a promotional post which will create difficulties in terms of retention and replacement of staff.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The claim constitutes a cost-increasing claim not permitted under 'Towards 2016' and its implementation would require formal sanction from the Higher Education Authority and the Departments of Education & Science and Finance.
2. Concession would have the effect of upsetting relativities within the Building Office and the College Executive pay scales inevitably leading to knock-on claims throughout the College.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court fully endorses both the principle and the content of LCR 16788. Having regard to that Recommendation, there is an existing agreement providing for the current linkage since 1993, which can only be changed by agreement.
The Union is claiming that the 1993 linkage is no longer appropriate.
The Court sees merit in the parties reviewing the matter and, accordingly, recommends that the parties engage with one another to consider what the appropriate linkage may be going forward.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
7th. January, 2008______________________
JF.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.