FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Management’s refusal to reinstate a regarding scheme for Administration Staff.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the refusal of the Employer to reinstate the regrading scheme for Administrative staff in the College. 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 7th October, 2013, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 6th March, 2014.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Since 1996, the opportunity existed for Administrative staff, who were performing jobs/duties above their grade to have their job assessed and then if appropriate, regraded by a University Administrative Staff Job Grading Committee. This was suspended in 2008.
2. The Employment Control Framework (ECF) for the Higher Education Sector, 2011 – 2014 clearly allows for the return of regrading/Promotion.
3. Of the three largest categories of employees in the University, only the Administrative staff have been deprived the formal process of regrading/Promotion.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The University employs over 800 administrative staff. Historically these grades have been afforded access to a job grading scheme (known as the Administrative Grading Scheme).
2. In 2008, the University was obliged to suspend all academic promotion schemes and the Administrative Grading Scheme because of its budgetary situation.
3. The ECF was revised in June 2011 which did not alter the position in relation to job grading/evaluation for University employees. The University proposed to review the Job Evaluation Scheme and make recommendations as appropriate. However SIPTU has declined to engage in the process.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is noted that the cessation of the job evaluation scheme arose in circumstances which are of general application across the public service. While the University has a limited capacity to effect promotions, what is being sought is a reinstatement of a job evaluation scheme.
It is noted that within the current restraints on all public service bodies the University is prepared to review the job evaluation scheme and has invited the union to participate in the review. In the context of that review the University should ensure that the grades associated with this claim are not placed at a disadvantage vis-�-vis other grades within the University, including academic and technical staff.
On that basis the Union should reconsider its position in relation to participation in the review.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
CR______________________
14th March, 2014.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.