FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : DONEGAL CO. COUNCIL - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Salary Scale
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union's claim is on behalf of 7 members at Area Manager level. The dispute relates back to the Better Local Government Agreement (BLG) of 2001 when a number of posts - at five levels, including Area Manager - were created to introduce a "unified management structure". Sixteen Area Manager posts were created - nine from technical grades and the seven concerned from administrative grades. The Council sought sanction from the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (the Department) for the new structure, including appropriate comparable pay scales. The Union's case is that while the correct pay scales were applied to the nine workers from the technical grades they were not applied to the seven Area Managers concerned who should have received the equivalent of Grade VIII within the Public Service. This has resulted in a current loss of pay of between €11,000 and €13,000 for the seven workers concerned. In May, 2008, the Council sought to reduce the differential by half but did not receive confirmation from the Department.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Court and a conciliation conference took place. As the parties did not reach agreement the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 13th November, 2008, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 20th May, 2009, in Donegal.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. There is no dispute that the two sets of Area Managers are at the same level of management and doing the same work. They have carried out their new roles diligently, believing that the pay anomaly would be dealt with. Despite this the workers concerned have been paid less than their colleagues since 2001 resulting in considerable losses for them.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Council acknowledges the anomaly that exists for the workers concerned but it has to work within the nationally established Pay and Grading Structures as approved by the Department. The Council cannot unilaterally decide to adjust the pay scale for any grade in the absence of such approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
The claim before the Court concerns the Union’s claim on behalf of seven Area Managers for the removal of a pay differential which exists following the creation of two posts in 2001 at the same level of management; one from clerical/administrative grades and one from technical grades.
The Union seeks the elimination of the differential in pay between the two grades, appropriate retrospection and compensation. As the Council must operate within nationally-established pay and grading structures, and there was no appropriate recognised grade at clerical/administrative level for the new posts, the Department for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government sanctioned the creation of the Administrative Officer Scale (AO) plus a payment of £3000 for the new posts, whereas the technical posts were graded at Senior Executive Engineer Grade. This arrangement was to be subject “to a review at the end of a testing period”. The current differential between the two grades ranges from €11,056 to €13,407.
In an attempt to address the claim the Council proposed to reduce the differential by half and sought sanction from the Department for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, which has not been forthcoming.
Having examined the oral and written submissions of the parties the Court is satisfied that, as it is accepted that the two posts are at the same level of management, parity of pay is justified and recommends that the differential should be eliminated over a period of eighteen months from the date of this Recommendation. In the circumstances the Court does not recommend in favour of the Union’s claim for retrospection or compensation.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
8th June, 2006______________________
CONDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.