FULL RECOMMENDATION
CD/22/52 CC166009-21 | RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR22625 |
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES :KILKENNY COUNTY COUNCIL (REPRESENTED BY LGMA)
- AND -
26 WATER CARETAKERS (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION CONNECT)
DIVISION :
Chairman: | Ms Connolly | Employer Member: | Mr Murphy | Worker Member: | Ms Treacy |
SUBJECT:
1.1. Payment Of Availability Allowance In Line With Arrangements for Craftworkers and GSS's. 2. Compensation Of €2,000 P/A For Each Year For Provided Out Of Hours Services
BACKGROUND:
2.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 7 March 2022 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 20 May 2022.
UNION ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union is seeking the introduction of a local availability allowance for the caretakers in Kilkenny County Council Water Services. They stated that these caretakers provide an out of hours service and are employed on 24/7 basis with the expectation that they be available when required.
2. The Union contends that for out of hours services being provided the caretakers should be treated on an equal basis to Craftworkers and GSSs and be provided with an availability allowance. The availability allowance being sought is a payment of 4 flat hours per week.
3.The Union is also seeking compensation payment for all 26 caretakers at a rate of €2,000 per person per annum for each year during which he/she has provided out of hours services EMPLOYER ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Employer’s position is that the introduction of an availability allowance is a national issue and it would have to be done on a national basis encompassing all local authorities.
2. The Employermaintains that Irish Water provides funding for water services and that even if the Council considered that there was merit in the Unions’ arguments consultation with Irish Water would be required.
3. The Employercontends that the Labour Court referral and subsequent recommendation related specifically to 2 named individuals and it did not accept that compensation should be paid to all other caretakers within the Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
The dispute before the Court concerns 26 Water Caretakers, represented by SIPTU and Connect, who submit that they are treated less favourably than other grades in Kilkenny County Council for providing out of hours services. They seek that an availability allowance in place for GSS and Craft grades be implemented for Water Caretakers. They further seek that each Water Caretaker is compensated at a rate of €2,000 per annum for each year during which he or she provided on-call services.
The Union outlined that the matter in dispute is a longstanding issue, although not formally progressed through procedures until 2018, when specific issues were raised on behalf of two workers (the subject of LCR22414). The 26 Water Caretakers, who are the subject of this referral, are contractually obliged to be available at any time to deal with special contingencies or to act in an emergency. As a result, they should be treated on an equal basis to Craftworkers and GSS’s who are provided with an availability allowance for providing out of hours services. The availability allowance sought is a payment of 4 flat hours per week. The Unions also seek that each Water Caretaker is compensated at a rate of €2,000 per annum for each year during which he or she provided on-call services, as recommended by the Court in LCR22414 in response to a claim for retrospection taken by two Water Caretakers in the Council. The Unions submit that they will not provide a service without being paid. The Council outlined that callouts by Water Caretakers were historically managed through mutually suitable arrangements, that operated within a standard 39 hour working week, with no requirement for a formal out-of-hours rota. The Council acknowledge that the situation has evolved and become more structured in recent years. The Council has not rejected the claim outright.
The Council does not accept that LCR22414 is relevant to the matter before the Court, as that recommendation was specific to two named individuals, and did not address the payment of an ongoing allowance into the future.
The Council is open to engaging in relation to an allowance but is of the view that the matter should be engaged on at a national level, as the introduction of such an allowance (where one has never existed for Water Caretakers) is a national issue which will affect all Local Authorities. It is not a matter solely related to Kilkenny County Council. SIPTU were invited to raise the matter nationally through the Local Authority National Council or the Irish Water Consultative Group. The Council advise that Irish Water would need to be consulted, as the services are funded by them. It has engaged with Irish Water who advise that any claim on behalf of Water Caretakers cannot be negotiated by local authorities without regard to an overall national plan.
The Court has given careful consideration to the oral and written submissions made by the parties.
The Unions seek that the Court recommends that the availability arrangements in place other grades in Kilkenny County council are put in place for Water Caretakers. The Unions were invited to raise this issue at a national level but rejected that approach as, in their view, the matter is a local one where payments can be agreed locally that have regard to specific circumstances or requirements. Notwithstanding this, the Unions acknowledged to the Court that the outcome of any negotiations on the introduction of an availability allowance for Water Caretakers in Kilkenny Council have potential ramifications for other local authorities. Furthermore, the Court was told of similar issues in two other Local Authorities, where SIPTU is seeking different payments/allowances for the provision of out of normal hours services by Water Caretakers. In these circumstances, the Court is being asked to make a recommendation about the introduction of an allowance and payment of retrospection in Kilkenny County Council, when it is acknowledged by the parties that any recommendation made by the Court has potential consequences for other local authorities. The Court does not have the benefit of the views of those other local authorities on the matter before it.
The Court notes that the Council has not rejected the unions claims and has confirmed its willingness to engage with the unions in order to address this issue on an national level. Furthermore, the Council advised the Court that Irish Water communicated a willingness to engage on the subject with a view to a consistent and national approach on the matter where all Local Authorities hold the same staff and requirements in relation to Water Caretakers. In circumstances where there is a willingness on the part of the County Council to address this issue, and a pathway for addressing the dispute at a national level has been identified, the Court does not believe it would be appropriate to make a definitive recommendation on the introduction of an availability allowance in Kilkenny County Council.
The Court recommends that the parties enter into meaningful engagement in line with their established procedures with a view to resolving this matter at an appropriate national forum. Finally, the parties advised the Court that the implementation of LCR22414 remains a matter of ongoing dispute between the parties. The Court notes that the parties have sought clarification from the relevant Court division in respect of that recommendation. As the implementation of LCR22414 is not a matter before this Division, it is not appropriate for the Court to make any comment or recommendation on the matter. The Court so recommends. | Signed on behalf of the Labour Court | | | | Katie Connolly | DC | ______________________ | 15 July 2022 | Deputy Chairman |
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David Campbell, Court Secretary. |