FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT AGENCY - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Treacy |
1. Job evaluation scheme.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the Employer and the Union in relation to the introduction of a job evaluation scheme. The dispute relates specifically to the Union's claim for a job evaluation scheme to be put in place throughout the Local Government Sector. The Union contends that such a scheme is in operation within the Health Sector and provides clarity around grade and pay determination. The Employer rejects the Union's claim, arguing that a job evaluation scheme has never operated in the Civil and Public Service and there is no business case for its introduction.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a number of Conciliation Conferences under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 30th June, 2017, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 27th October, 2017.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union contends that a joint job evaluation scheme was agreed between the parties in 1971.
2. The Union maintains that this scheme continues to be relevant in that the same job descriptions and grading structure remain in place.
3. The Union asserts that a job evaluation scheme would provide an objective and independent method for agreeing the correct rate of pay for any job which would be beneficial to all employees.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Employer contends that no formal agreement was entered into with the Union.
2. The Employer is of the view that there is no business case for the introduction of a job evaluation scheme.
3. The Employer maintains that the introduction of a job evaluation scheme would be contrary to current government policy.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns a claim by the Union for the introduction of a job evaluation scheme for Local Authority Grades represented by IMPACT Trade Union. It stated that the clerical/administrative grading structures for health services and local authorities were established in 1971 and have largely continued to this day. At the time job descriptions were agreed between the employers and unions. In order to bring those job descriptions up to date, the Union sought a joint review of the job descriptions at the Local Authority National Council in October 2016.
The Union stated that historically there has been a significant degree of commonality in pay and conditions of employment and together with similar grades in the education sector derived from a single labour market. In 2007 the Union and the HSE agreed a new job evaluation scheme for the health services, however, the scheme did not become operational until October 2016. Shortly prior to this the Union lodged the claim which is before the Court. The Union maintained that the introduction of an agreed job evaluation scheme for the said grades in the local authority sector would provide an objective and independent methodology for agreeing the correct rate of pay for any given job and would assist with staff flexibility and goodwill.
Management rejected the claim on the basis that such a scheme had never existed in the local government sector or in any other part of the public service generally (with the exception of the health sector). It submitted that such a scheme would be cost increasing and therefore outside the scope of Clause 1.27 of the Public Service Agreement 2010- 2014. Furthermore, it submitted that the introduction would be contrary to current government and public service policy.
Management informed the Court that within the local authority sector there is an exercise ongoing at the moment to draw up new job descriptions for clerical/administrative grades. It is expected that this exercise will be completed within the next six months.
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court is not satisfied that a business case has been put forward for the introduction of a job evaluation scheme as claimed. However, the Court is prepared to consider such a business case if made out by the Union. In the meantime the Court notes the job description exercise being conducted by Management of the grades encompassed by this claim.
On that basis the Court cannot concede the Union’s claim at this time.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
17th November 2017______________________
SCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.