FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : NATIONAL COLLEGE OF IRELAND (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. 1. A pay reduction 2. Freezing of Pension Scheme
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns a proposal by the College to implement a pay reduction in line with that of the Public Sector and to put a freeze on the Pension Scheme for a period of two years. In 2009 the parties had agreed to a pay and increment freeze but the Union rejected the College's proposal of a pay cut. The College's position is that it needs to implement the cuts because of its severe financial situation (the College supplied details to the Court).
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission (LRC) and a conciliation conference took place. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 18th April, 2011, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 10th June, 2011.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union accepts that the College has serious financial difficulties and has indicated its willingness to negotiate. However, the College has been unwilling to do so.
2. The Public Sector pay cuts proposed are inappropriate; staff are not paid with public money nor are they linked to Public Sector scales. In addition members continue to be bound by a pay/increment freeze. Members cannot afford cuts of the order proposed by the College.
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS
4. 1. The College has produced a strategic plan which, while challenging, will return the College to viability. Failure to implement changes would have serious repercussions for the College. It has consistently kept the Union advised of the situation with numerous meetings taking place with staff since late 2010.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issues before the Court concerns the College’s proposals to reduce rates of pay and to cease accrual of service and payment of contributions into the defined benefit pension scheme for a period of two years.
The College outlined for the Court the severe financial difficulties it is experiencing and highlighted the necessity to take such measures as are necessary to ensure the viability of the College. It outlined details of measures already taken, including pay reductions for a small number of staff at management level. The College submitted proposals modelled along the lines of the public sector reduction in pay, which reduced pay in accordance with various salary bands.
The Union accepts that the College is in a serious financial position, indicated its willingness to negotiate with the College and informed the Court that it has a mandate to negotiate on pay reductions in order to address the difficulties. While the Union indicated the level of reductions it could tolerate, it was not willing to accept the level proposed by the College.
The Court has considered the submissions of the parties together with the financial information in support of those submissions, all of which was circulated to the Union and the financial experts within the Union for consideration.
Having considered the submission made and the financial information supplied to the Court, the Court notes that there is no disagreement between both sides on the necessity for the cost savings.
The Court is of the view that the parties should meet to build on the discussions embarked upon at conciliation regarding the implementation of a pay reduction in order to arrive at an agreed solution. Resolution of changes in the Pension Scheme should also form part of those discussions.
Given the serious financial position of the College the Court recommends that the discussions be concluded within a time frame of three weeks from the date of this Recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
16th June, 2010______________________
CONDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.