FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : ROSCOMMON COUNTY COUNCIL - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Appeal Against The Recommendation Of A Rights Commissioner R-055894-Ir-07/Sr
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker has been employed as a general operative on a permanent basis with the Council since 2000. The Union argues that he has carried out work on a regular basis that is in fact craft work. The Council rejects this claim on the basis that the duties carried out by the worker are those of a Semi-skilled Operative, a position to which he was permanently appointed in January, 2008.
The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 5th March, 2008 the Rights Commissioner issued his recommendation as follows:
"I accept that the Claimant is engaged in a lot of work with a craft dimension to it. There is considerable merit in the claim. I recommend that the claimant's pay rate be increased to 90% of the craft rate effective from 1st September 2007 on a personal to holder basis."
On the 22nd April, 2008 the Employer appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 8th July, 2008.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The worker concerned performs work on a constant basis which is work appropriate to the craft grade and does it unsupervised by a Craftsman.
2 The knowledge and skill of the worker is only recognised by the Council when it comes to allocating work. This results in a saving for the Council who would otherwise have to employ a qualified Craftsman.
3 The worker has to use his own car to carry tools and attend call outs. Another employee in the Council doing the same work is paid 90% of the craft rate and supplied with a van
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 The worker concerned is not and has not been carrying out craftwork duties. The duties being carried out by the worker are that of a semi-skilled operative which is the position he holds as of January, 2008.
2 A review of staffing structures was carried out by the Council. This included long term continuous Acting appointments. As the worker was not acting Semi-Skilled Operative on a continuous basis he was not initially included. However, following representations from the Union the worker was included with a view to regularising his position. The worker applied for a number of posts. He was unsuccessful for the post of Craftsperson but successful for the post of Semi-Skilled Operative.
3. The council considers that the worker is adequately and fairly remunerated for the performance of his duties as a Semi-Skilled Operative.
DECISION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties, the court affirms the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner and dismisses the Council's appeal.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
23rd July, 2008______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.