FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : NATIONAL COLLEGE OF ART & DESIGN - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Haugh Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Contracts
BACKGROUND:
2. The Claim before the Court concerns a claim by the Union in relation to terms and conditions of employment. The dispute relates to the terms and conditions of hourly-paid tutors and lecturers employed by the National College of Art & Design. The Union referred this case to the Labour Court on 25th August, 2015 in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 15thDecember, 2015.
UNION'S ARGUMENT:
The National College of Art and Design is using the status of the lecturers as hourly paid to undermine their rights and entitlements. The College is seeking to treat this group of workers as casual workers but we have provided evidence of the comparability between this group of workers and the lecturing staff. SIPTU claims its members have replaced full-time lecturing staff for a fraction of what the college should have to pay. It is SIPTU's argument that their members have been badly treated by their employer and that despite lengthy negotiations, both at local level and under the auspices of the LRC, they never had any intention of addressing the claim in any meaningful way.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENT:
The College rejects outright the assertion that all part-time tutors are fulfilling the full gamut of duties and responsibilities that a member of the permanent lecturing staff does. The College says that the vast majority of part-time staff are involved only in teaching duties. The College does not believe that it is appropriate to deal with this matter through the mechanism of a Section 20 referral. The issue is too complex and has a large potential impact, not only for the National College of Art & Design but for the sector as a whole to be decided on the basis of a single hearing.
RECOMMENDATION:
The dispute between the parties concerns the terms and conditions of hourly-paid tutors and lecturers engaged by the National College of Art & Design (“the College”). The Union is seeking comparable terms and conditions for the aforementioned group of workers as those enjoyed by non-hourly paid academic staff of the College.
This matter was referred to the Court by the Union under section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 although the parties had previously availed of the Conciliation Service of the Workplace Relations Commission in relation to this and related matters. The College declined to agree to a referral from the WRC to the Labour Court under section 26 of the Industrial Relations Act 1990.
In the circumstances, the Court, on sitting to investigate the dispute firstly asked the parties to clarify whether there was an agreement in place between the Union and the College which provided for the resolution of disputes and if so what were the terms of that agreement. The parties confirmed that such an agreement was in place and undertook to submit a copy of it to the Court in early course. The Court adjourned pending receipt and consideration of the terms of the agreement.
The aforementioned agreement provides, at paragraphs 4. and 5. as follows:
“4. If, after negotiations between the College and the [Union], either party wishes to pursue the matter further, that party shall refer the dispute to the conciliation service of the [WRC] …5. It is the firm intention of the parties to this agreement to make every effort to settle disputes either through direct negotiation or through conciliation as specified in the preceding paragraphs, and to handle all issues arising between them fairly and quickly. If, however, despite all efforts a dispute remains unsettled and either party wishes to pursue it further, the matter shall be referred to a full hearing of the Labour Court on a joint request basis.”
Having considered the foregoing, the Court recommends that the parties re-engage with the Conciliation Service of the WRC. The Court remains available to assist the Parties at any stage thereafter.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
10th February, 2016______________________
CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.