FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : NORTH WEST PARENTS AND FRIENDS (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms O'Donnell |
1. Non-payments of Increments
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns a claim for payment of increments. 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 24th June, 2016, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 17th November, 2016.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The Workers are entitled to be paid salary increments in line with their peers in the HSE.
2 There is an agreed salary alignment existing between the workers and HSE consolidated pay scales.
3 Increments should be paid in the same manner as HSE.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The Employer cannot afford to pay the increments.
2 As a result of a reduction in funding from the HSE the employer, in line with most other Non-Statutory Organisations which are funded under Section 39 of the Health Act 2004, must cease payment of increments.
3. In the absence of funding from the HSE for payment of increments no option exists to reduce the service levels provided in order to fund the payment of increments.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has carefully considered the written and oral submissions of the parties.
The Court notes the contention of the employer as regards the contractual position of the Trade Union members. The Court notes howver that the parties are agreed that the staff associated with this claim are aligned for pay purposes with HSE staff.
The Court cannot reconcile an agreement as regards alignment for pay purposes to HSE with the ongoing failure to apply increments.
The Court has considerable sympathy with the employer who finds itself in an unsatisfactory situation influenced largely by its funding authority whose support traditionally made possible the payment of increments in a manner consistent with the regime applying to staff of the HSE.
Notwithstanding the challenge faced by the employer the Court, noting the agreed alignment with HSE, must acknowledge the entitlement of the staff concerned to increments. The Court recommends concession of the Trade Union claim and in particular to the re-institution of the practice of paying increments. In that regard the Court notes that the acknowledged date of claim in the matter was 9thSeptember 2015.
The Court notes the emphasis laid by the parties on the role of the funding authority and the trade Union side contention that the funding authority has supported the resolution of similar matters in two other similar employments.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
29th November, 2016______________________
CCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.