FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : KILDARE COUNTY COUNCIL (REPRESENTED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT AGENCY) - AND - 10 REVENUE COLLECTORS (REPRESENTED BY F�RSA) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms O'Donnell Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. The reorganisation of the Revenue Collector role within the County Council.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the reorganisation of the Revenue Collector role in the 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 16 March 2018 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 30 May 2018.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Council resiled unilaterally from a mutually binding agreement which had, as one of its key principles, the protection of the Workers.
2. At no point in the past or up to the present, has there been criticism of the original arrangements for the compilation of the Register of Electors from any of the stakeholders.
3. No evidence has ever been adduced to show that the outsourcing of this work has yielded any savings or that it has brought added value in terms of service delivery or protection of the Register of Electors.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
- 1. Proposal 1 makes no changes to the terms and conditions of employment of the Workers. They would remain analogous to Grade 4 Assistant Staff Officer as non-office based Revenue Collectors.
2. Proposal 2 provides for Revenue Collectors to be regraded as Staff Officers with revenue collection duties and to be office based.
3. The Council has confirmed its willingness to compensate for any loss of earnings under the provisions of the Public Service Agreement where such restructuring or changes take place.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issues in dispute between the parties concern a group of Revenue Collectors. Each has a designated geographical area, which involves calling in person to rate payer’s premises. The work attracts travel and subsistence expenses. The Revenue Collectors generally operate from their homes. Nearly all other County Councils have moved to more modern methods of Revenue collection and absorbed their Revenue Collectors into their clerical/administrative structures as office based staff with an element of out-door work. Kildare County Council want to modernise this function and have set out two options for the Revenue Collectors but no agreement could be reached. The second issue relates to a unilateral decision by the Council in 2013 to change the way they compile the Register of Electors. This work was previously done by the Revenue Collectors and was worth up to six thousand euro per annum to each of the Revenue Collectors. The Revenue Collectors are seeking that this work be re-instated. Both parties confirmed to the Court that the referral was made under the Public Sector Agreement and therefore binding on both parties.
Union’s position.
It is the Union’s position that the Employer resiled unilaterally from a written agreement in relation to the manner in which work related to the compilation of the Register of Electors was carried out a year after the agreement was reached in 2012. This has resulted in a loss of income for the Revenue Collectors with a consequential impact on future pension. It is the Union’s position that the new way of compiling the Register does not create significant benefits for the Council and they are seeking that this work be returned to the Revenue Collectors. If this was to happen then the discussions in relation to the reconfiguration of the collection of Revenue could be successfully concluded as significant progress had been made before the management triggered the end of the process by referring the issue to the Labour Court. While the Union is seeking clarification on a number of issues in this regard they do not believe that their concerns are insurmountable.
Employer’s position.
In 2014 Kildare County Council reviewed its structure for the delivery of Revenue Collector functions. Following that review the Council entered into negotiations with FORSA which cumulated in two proposals either of which the Council could live with. The first proposal while it involved changes to the work being done it does not involve any change to the Revenue Collectors terms and conditions. The second proposal provided for the Revenue Collectors to be regraded to staff officer grade with revenue collection duties and be office based. The only requirement is that the Revenue Collectors as a group will have to agree on an option. It is not possible, nor feasible for individuals to have a choice of the options. From the Councils perspective it is essential that the Council restructures its Revenue Collection structures to reflect the environment in which it now operates. In relation to the cessation of field work on the register of electors in 2012 the Council, following a review, decided to implement a more cost effective and efficient way of doing this work. The Council commenced discussions in April 2013 with Forsa in relation to this issue and advised that they did not require the Revenue Collectors to undertake field work in respect of the 2014/2015 register. The Council is satisfied with the new method for doing this work and can see no basis for returning to the old method. The Council is willing to compensate for any loss of earnings arising from this loss of work in accordance with the Public Service Agreement.
Decision
The Court having carefully read the submissions of both parties and listened to the oral submissions made at the hearing recommends that the Council compensate the workers for loss arising from the fact they are no longer required to undertake field work in respect of the Register of Electors. The compensation should be calculated at one and a half times the loss in accordance with the Public Service Agreement. In relation to the restructuring of the work of the Revenue Collectors the Union should engage with its members as to which of the two proposals tabled by management they wish to opt for. The Council should be notified and then local discussions should take place on the implementation of the chosen proposal.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Louise O'Donnell
CR______________________
14 June, 2018.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.