FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : AER LINGUS LIMITED TRADING AS AER LINGUS - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Haugh Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Claim for payment for headset, pushback and aircraft marshalling and towing duties for Cork Airport Operatives in line with the Dublin Airport Agreement.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute relates to the value of off-scale payments in recognition of tasks undertaken by Ramp Operatives in Cork Airport. This dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 7th June, 2016, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 31st August, 2016.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3.1. The functions and the responsibilities of both the Cork and Dublin Workers are the same.
2. Dublin has a dedicated team undertaking these functions. However, in Cork the Workers must be flexible to perform the functions.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4.1. There are major differences between Cork and Dublin Airport. The work is not like-for-like and the distribution of the reward over the workforce is not like-for-like.
2. The skill set required to do the tasks in Dublin varies considerably as a result of ramp congestion and the high levels of aircraft towing.
RECOMMENDATION:
Background to the Dispute
The within dispute relates to a claim brought by the Union on behalf of its members who are employed as Ramp Operatives at Cork Airport who have been trained for, and performing for several years, a number of additional duties previously undertaken by the Respondent’s Maintenance and Engineering staff. Such duties include head setting and marshalling of aircraft as well as the push-back and towing of aircraft. The Union is seeking additional remuneration for the Workers concerned commensurate with the added responsibilities they have assumed by agreeing to perform those extra duties.
The Respondent concluded a collective agreement (referred to as the “Blueprint Agreement”) with the Union in December 2014 in respect of Ramp Operatives who perform the aforementioned duties at Dublin Airport. The Blueprint Agreement introduced a qualification-based payment structure in recognition of the different skill levels that must be achieved by persons performing head set, pushback and aircraft towing functions.
Recommendation
Having considered in detail the parties’ written and oral submissions, the Court recommends that the relevant provisions of the Blueprint Agreement be applied to those Ramp Operatives employed at Cork Airport who achieve the necessary training and who perform the tasks encompassed by the Blueprint Agreement.
The Court further recommends that the Cork Ramp Operatives referred to in the previous paragraph should be paid the qualification payments provided for in the Blueprint Agreement retrospectively and with effect from 1 January 2016.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
15th September 2016______________________
JKDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jason Kennedy, Court Secretary.