FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - AND - UNITE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Grading of Veterinary Nurses.
BACKGROUND:
2. The University College Dublin (UCD) Veterinary Hospital is part of the School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine and is located on the main UCD campus.
The case before the Court concerns five Veterinary Nurses, members of Unite, who are on fixed term contracts and who are currently on a salary scale of laboratory attendants/ store persons despite their contracts stating that the posts are Veterinary Nurses and that there are required qualifications to carry out this work.
It is the Union's position that historically Veterinary Nurses in UCD have been employed on technician grades, now technical officer grades. The College have stated that historically the technical officer grades have applied to the Senior Nurses employed in the Veterinary Hospital.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of two conciliation conferences under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 2nd April 2009, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 27th May, 2009.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.In an e-mail from the former Human Resources Manager to the Union in 2007 it was stated that both permanent and contract Veterinary Nurses are employed on Technical Officer (TO) scales.
2. The Union contends that both it and UCD have agreed that the only body which exclusively determines the qualifications for technical officer grades is the TQPC (technicians qualifications promotions committee) and that therefore it is not within the remit of the Veterinary College Management to determine grading structures and introduce changes which reflect and impact on employees remuneration.
3. It is the Union's contention that all Veterinary Nurses, regardless of their contracts, should be placed on the Technical Officer scale as per their qualifications and that the College should adjust members pay scales to that of technical officer with any retrospective payments being addressed.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. UCD is the only Veterinary training institute in the state. As such there was no historical precedent or comparator for the development of a Veterinary Nurse scale. This situation led to the placement of Veterinary Nurses on the Technical Officer scale. UCD see this as an historical anomaly as the work of a Veterinary Nurse bears no correlation to that of a Technician in UCD.
2. Management contends that the Technical Officer payment is unrealistic and unsustainable ( particularly in the current economic climate) as it is far in excess of payment levels in the private sector.
3. Management maintains that individuals employed as Junior Veterinary Nurses are paid for the first two years of post qualification on a specific scale commensurate with their lack of professional experience and assignment of a limited range of duties under supervision; the applicable scale is called the Laboratory Attendant scale. After two years experience they are placed on the Technical Officer scale.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court accepts the Management's statement that Laboratory Attendant is the correct entry grade for Veterinary Nurses and that, following two years' post-diploma experience, they move automatically onto the Technical Officer (T.O.) grade.
The Court recommends that the Claimants be placed onto the T.O. grade with effect from the dates on which they attain or have attained two years' post-diploma service/experience.
The question of what the appropriate entry grading should be for Veterinary Nurses in UCD into the future is one for discussion directly between the parties.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
29th May, 2009______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.