FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : NATIONAL MUSEUM OF IRELAND - AND - CPSU DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Application of Incremental Credit
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union's claim concerns the application of incremental credit to 18 workers in the Science and Arts Attendant (S&AA) Grade in the National Museum. The Museum come under the auspice of the Department of Art, Sport and Tourism. The Union cited the Department of Finance circulars - Circular 21/2004 and Circular 16/2005 - and the Museum's Office Notice 01/06 which set out the principles governing the application of Incremental Credit. Circular 16/2005 refers to"Agreement on incremental credit for previous service for entry levels at Service Officer or Service Attendant, or equivalent grades represented by the Federated Union of Government Employees (FUGE)."The Union believes that the workers concerned, some of whom were former members of the Garda and the Defence Forces, should qualify based on their previous experience. The Museum's case is that the 8 workers do not meet the criteria for incremental credit. There were initially 21 applications and the Museum judged that 3 of these had the necessary previous experience to gain the incremental credit.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference took place. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 26th January, 2009, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 28th July, 2009.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The core function of the S&AA is security of the Museum and its artifacts, and safety and care of visitors. Approximately 85% of the duties of the workers concerned is taken up with this work.
2. The workers should qualify for the incremental credit as the broadly fulfil the criteria as set out. Given the unique nature of their roles there would be little or no consequential impact across the Civil Service.
MUSEUM'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Department of Finance advised the Museum that former members of the Garda and the Defence Forces were not seen as equivalent grades to the S&AAs.Only service in the same grade or in the one directly above can reckon.
2. The criteria for incremental credit required a minimum of 80% comparison of duties with former experience. On this basis only 3 of the 21 applicants were deemed to have sufficient experience
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns the Unions claims on behalf of 18 workers for incremental credit in line with Department of Finance Circular 16/2005"Agreement on incremental credit for previous service for entry levels at Services Officer or Services Attendant, or equivalent grades represented by the Federated Union of Government Employees (FUGE)".
The claimants are employed as Science & Arts Attendants in the Museum.
Management stated that Departments and their Agencies are obliged to ensure that entry above the minimum of the scale is strictly limited to authenticated claims and explained that credit cannot be awarded unless the employing Department/Agency has satisfactorily completed such measures, as it considers appropriate to authenticate the claim. It is necessary for the Department/Agency to check with the officer’s previous employer to determine whether the previous service is relevant and the final decision rests with the Department of Finance. Criteria to comply with this verification process were drawn up and approved by the Department of Finance. These required a minimum of 80% comparison of duties for consideration in terms of matching the duties of the post with their previous qualifying public service experience for an award.
The Union sought to have the assessment criteria reviewed so that those claimants who broadly fulfil the criteria should qualify for the incremental credit.
When the duties of the Science & Arts Attendant in the Museum were examined by Management it was decided to rate the various elements of the duties as follows: -
- Security/Safety 30%
Reception/Switchboard 20%
Post/Set Up 20%
Cleaning 15%
Customer Care 15%
The Union produced a different ranking analysis of the duties involved, placing more emphasis on the Security/Safety and Customer Care aspects of the job.
The Court notes that the methodology used in line with Circular 16/2005 to recognise previous service for incremental credit purposes is threefold, as follows: -
(a) the duties must be comparable
(b) the claims must be authenticated
(c) previous experience in the public service must be relevant
Having considered the submissions of both parties, the Court is of the view that an independent analysis of the Science & Arts Attendant post should be carried out to provide an independent evaluation of the relative components of the job with an appropriate ranking of the duties involved.
The Court recommends that this exercise should be carried out by an agreed Independent Examiner without delay and in any event should be fully completed by not later than the end of October 2009.
This evaluation should then be used to apply Circular 16/2005 to the claimants involved.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
18th August, 2009______________________
CONDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.