FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Hearing Arising From LCR20868
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns a dispute between UCD and SIPTU on the implementation of Section 2.26 of the Haddington Road Agreement in respect of Modular Paid Teachers in the Business School. 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 14th August, 2015, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 25th September, 2015.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1The Workers concerned are paid on a modular basis and therefore the application of Clause 2.24 of the Public Service Stability Agreement is not appropriate in this case.
2The Workers are denied the terms and conditions of their full time lecturer colleagues yet are expected to suffer similar pay cuts.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1It is well established that cost-increasing claims under the PSSA is prohibited. The formula used is both fair reasonable and consistent in the circumstances to all the staff.
2Although the Union argues that the workers are equivalent to full-time lecturing staff "for pension and incremental progression" this was found not to be the case from the findings of the Duke Report and on foot of the Duke Report, there is an extant Labour Court recommendation, accepted by both sides, which does not agree with the union's argument.
RECOMMENDATION:
In Recommendation LCR20868 the Court asked the parties to identify similar or equivalent arrangements to those proposed in other third level institutions applicable to comparable staff. The Court was informed at the second hearing of the dispute that there are no directly comparable grades who are similarly remunerated.
The Court is satisfied the circumstances of those associated with this claim are unique within the educational sector. In that context they are neither comparable to Lecturers nor are they part-time workers nor job-sharers, properly so called.
In the circumstances the Court recommends that in accordance with the Public Service Agreement the pay reductions should not apply to those whose earnings are below the level specified in the Agreement.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
2nd November, 2015______________________
CCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.