FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Outsourcing provisions of the Public Service Agreement.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute initially concerned a breach of outsourcing provisions of the Public Service Agreement. Dublin City Council (DCC) has responsibility for the management of two hostels in which staff are direct employees of DCC.
DCC said Management’s role as regulator, funder and coordinator has altered its capacity to continue in a direct provision role. The decision to exit the direct provision of hostel services is not driven by a requirement to reduce the costs involved in the provision of this service.
The decision is based on the statutory role that the council is required to deliver in order to ensure that all resources are directed under the new governance model to seek to tackle Homelessness in the Dublin Region.
The Unions had previously agreed to close a third hostel. Agreement was only reached so to protect the future of the remaining workforce. The workers affected by that closure did not suffer any reduction to their terms and conditions.
This 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 23rd October 2014, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 17th December 2014.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned provide accommodation and food service for tenants in the hostels and provide a sleeping bag service for the homeless and man a “Freephone” service at night.
- 2. The Union said if outsourcing is to proceed as planned, their members will not only be redeployed to another section of the Council, but would also see their terms and conditions drastically affected.
4. 1. The employees will be reassigned to other roles within DCC and their remuneration will be met by DCC.
2. In order to explore with the employees the viable options and to fully outline any financial impacts on them resulting from loss of allowances etc. management propose to enter into a facilitated process with the affected staff.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter formally referred to the Court concerned an alleged breach of the Public Service Stability Agreement 2013 – 2014 arising from a proposed change in the delivery of homeless services by the City Council. In the course of the hearing the parties accepted that the dominant issue in dispute relates to the impact of those changes on the pay and conditions of employment of affected staff. In these circumstances this recommendation is directed as providing a basis upon which that issue can be resolved.
It is noted that the City Council have proposed that a facilitated process be put in place to deal with the Unions’ concerns regarding redeployment of staff currently providing services to be transferred to other agencies. The Court believes that this proposal has considerable merit.
The Court recommends that the Unions should accept the City Council’s proposal in that regard. A mutually acceptable facilitator should be appointed by the parties for this purpose. In default of agreement the Court will make a nomination. The process should commence as soon as practicable and conclude by end March 2015.
All parties should accept that the purpose of the facilitated process will be to ameliorate, as far as possible, the adverse impact of the proposed changes on the current pay and conditions of those associated with the Unions’ claim. In that context all options should be open to consideration.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
CR______________________
22nd December, 2014.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.