FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : NATIONAL GALLERY OF IRELAND - AND - 50 ATTENDANT GRADES (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Integration of Attendant Grades.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case concerns a request by the Room Attendant's Grade to have their duties reintegrated with those of Security Attendant's Grade as was the practice before 1993. The reintegration issue is considered by the Union as a key element in providing a better working environment for all Attendants working at the National Gallery. Management's view is that security could be compromised if the segregation were to end.
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 27th July, 2009, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 7th January, 2010.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Before the PCW National Agreement, all Attendants were deployed to all security positions including the security control room on a rotating basis.
2. All Room Attendant Staff are fully security vetted and have received security clearance from An Garda Siochána
3. By allowing full integration, Attendants would experience more variety in their work and could improve the service that they give to the public.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Garda Siochána conducted a security survey in 2000 which concluded that the number of staff with access to and knowledge of Security Control Room procedures should be reduced.
2. Management are responsible for the National Art Collection and must be allowed manage security procedures as they see fit, without interference.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is noted that the underlying rationale for the Union's claim is a desire to provide its members with a greater variety of work and to provide them with a more amenable working environment. In the Court's view that is a reasonable objective which the Union is entitled to pursue. However, the means proposed by the Union is unacceptable to management because, they believe, it could compromise best security practice.
It appears to the Court that the Union's objective should be capable of achievement by other means which do not impinge on the maintenance of proper security systems and practices.
The Court recommends that the parties should have discussions for the purpose of examining how Union's stated objective could be advanced. It should, however, be accepted that this could not impinge on the maintenance of proper security systems, which is the sole responsibility of management.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
15th January, 2010______________________
JFChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.