LCR22891

Implementation of a review of Early Year Specialists in the Better Start Programme.

BACKGROUND:

This matter 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 matter was referred to the Labour Court on 11 October 2023 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 13 December 2023.

UNION’S ARGUMENTS:

The Union is seeking the implementation of the findings of an independent grading review that the employer

should consider extending the scale applicable to the 112 staff concerned by five incremental points.

EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:

The Employer maintains that budgetary constraints preclude them from exceeding the current scale, and that doing so would potentially have significant knock-on implications within the grade and across POBAL’s grading structure.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Court has given very careful consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties.

The parties agreed, on the basis of a proposal made by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) in January 2022, to a review of Early Years Specialist (EYS) Grades. That review would, as agreed by the parties, consider a range of matters including the requirement to (1) give due consideration to the financial implications of any recommendations made and, (2) industrial relations considerations in terms of implementing any recommendations made, and any potential knock-on implications for the organisation as a whole.

The agreed review related to the job roles of 112 EYS staff but did not encompass the job roles of 169 other Grade 2 staff employed by POBAL.

In the event, an independent consultancy was commissioned to carry out a grading review. That review found that the EYS Grade 2 staff were correctly graded within the POBAL suite of grades, at Grade 2.

The independent review, having reached this conclusion, went on to make a ‘finding’, which in the view of the Court manifests the characteristics of a recommendation, as follows:

POBAL to consider adapting the current Grade 2 salary scale (e.g. extend the scale beyond current point ten (10) of €52,894) with additional points aligned to external, comparable salaries.

The employer submitted to the Court that the terms of reference provided to the independent consultancy did not make provision for scale adaptation or extension.

The report of the independent consultancy was accepted by the employer and the trade union. The employer did give consideration to the finding / recommendation to extend the scale by five increments and concluded, for the reasons set out below, that POBAL was not in a position to adapt / extend the Grade 2 salary scale. Those reasons were:

• The current scale is in place across the company, fully aligned with public sector norms. It is not appropriate to deviate from the alignment with the broader public sector scale.
• It is not appropriate to breach the principle of cross-company equity by developing separate approaches to additional points on salary scales within the company.
• While the Forsa claim covers 112 Early Years Specialists, there are now 169 other staff employed by POBAL at this grade in a wide variety of roles across Finance, Administration etc. If this claim was conceded this would potentially have significant knock-on implications within the grade and more broadly across POBAL’s grading structure.
• This would have a very significant impact on the Company’s programmes of work and their ability to fulfil their obligations to Government.
• POBAL has no access to any additional budget that would allow them to exceed the current scale by adding the proposed additional points.

The employer costed the actual cost of the adaptation of scales applicable to the 112 workers at €1.2m approximately over five years, with a total cost implication of €2.16m over five years when combined with the potential cost of knock-on claims in the organisation.

It appears to the Court that the process of a grading review was initiated by agreement between the parties in January 2022 following an earlier disputed review. That review resulted a finding / recommendation that the employer should consider extending the scale applicable to the 112 staff concerned by five incremental points in their case.

It is indisputable that the employer did consider the adaptation of the scale for these workers in this manner. It is also, in the view of the Court, indisputable that the grounds upon which it reached its conclusions in respect of the matter were the grounds agreed by the parties in their acceptance of the January 2022 proposal made by the WRC and, specifically, related to (1) the financial implications of implementation of such a scale extension and, (2) the industrial relations implications including  potential knock-on implications within the organisation  as a whole.

The Court has not been made aware of any dispute between the parties as regards the conclusions reached by the employer on the issues of cost and potential industrial relations implications.

On that basis, the Court concludes that the report made by the independent consultants has been accepted by both parties and implemented as written.

In those circumstances, the Court recommends that the parties accept that the agreed review has been completed on the agreed terms and the findings / recommendations implemented in full. In the event that a pay claim remains for these 112 Grade 2 workers, the parties should engage with that matter as a new claim to be dealt with through agreed procedures as necessary.

The Court so recommends.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Kevin Foley
DC	______________________
20 December 2023	Chairman