FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MEATH COUNTY COUNCIL - AND - SENIOR EXECUTIVE ENGINEERS (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Connolly Worker Member: Ms Treacy |
1. Access To Flexi Time Arrangements For Senior Executive Engineers.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute relates to the application of flexible working time to Senior Executive Engineers and Senior Executive Planners in Meath County Council.
- 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 14th December 2017 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 26th January 2018.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
- Meath County Councils refusal to allow Senior Engineers access to flexi-leave is rooted in a belief that the Council would see a 12.5% increase in flexi leave in the organisation. This is particularly unlikely to happen amongst senior engineers given the nature of the workloads.
- The majority of Grade VII, Senior Executive Engineers, Senior Executive Planners and cognates in other Local Authorities have access to Flexi Time.
- There is no significant business or service reason for Meath County Council to continue to refuse access to the relevant grades.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
- Were the Council to accede to the Unions request, it would be difficult for the Council to continue to maintain services at the required levels.
- Flexi-time is not a statutory entitlement, furthermore, it is a matter for local determination as borne out by the fact that various individual disputes regarding flexi-time have been referred to the Labour Court for Recommendation.
- While not in a position to afford the leave entitlements of a flexi -time scheme, the Council is prepared to introduce a scheme whereby the remaining benefits of a flexi-time scheme, that is to say excluding leave, would apply for Senior Executive Engineers and Planners. The Council is also prepared to commit to an annual review of these flexi-time arrangements.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns the Unions claim for the access to Flexi-time for Senior Executive Engineers and Senior Executive Planners to the Council’s Flexitime System.
The Union based its claim on the provision in the Haddington Road Agreement which extended Flexible Working Arrangements to Grade Local Authorities Grade VII. It stated that the Claimants are analogous to Grade VII and such grades in other local authorities have access to flexitime with flexi leave.
Management conceded access to the claimants to its Flexi-time Policy, however, due to its concern over the implications of a build-up of flexi-leave, it restricted the policy to the Claimants and to provide them with access to flexible start and finish times only, subject to a review.
The Union rejected this offer and sought the inclusion of flexi-leave.
Management referred to the fact that the Claimants are self-managed and submitted that the need to manage flexible working arrangements would require new organisational arrangements which it does not have resources for. It submitted that the build-up of flexi leave could have a detrimental effect on its capacity to provide services to the public.
Having considered the submissions of both parties, the Court notes that Appendix 6 of the Haddington Road Agreement outlines the provision with regard to Flexible Working Arrangements. This includes a provision for the build-up of flexi leave to a maximum in any flexi period of one day.
In all the circumstances of this case, the Court recommends that flexi-time arrangements should be introduced for the Claimants in accordance with“Meath Local Authorities Flexi Policy”, with the stipulation that access to flexi-leave is restricted to a maximum of one day in a four-month flexi period, thereby yielding a maximum of 3 days’ flexi days per annum.
The Court recommends that these arrangements should be reviewed twelve months after the date of implementation.
The Court so Recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
JD______________________
29 January 2018Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Deegan, Court Secretary.