LCR22961

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

S26(1) Referral (CAM-100882-23)

BACKGROUND:

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 08 April 2024 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.   

A Labour Court hearing took place on 07 May 2024.        

UNION'S ARGUMENTS:              

1. The principal element of this matter before the Labour Court is that the SIPTU South Dublin County Council Litter Warden members should be in receipt of a “differential” payment, this is in-line with all other out-door General Operative related grades and workers of South Dublin County Council.              

2. South Dublin County Council Litter Wardens are part of the “outdoor” grades and are directly linked to the “General Operative” grades, this is argument is further supported by the 2009 South Dublin County Council Group of Unions Restructuring Agreement, which was completed during the time of the economic crisis.  

EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:              

1. It is the Council’s position that there is no differential available to the Claimants where criteria is met for the payment.                    

2. The Council would also assert that this is a cost increasing claim prohibited under the Public Stability Agreements.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Dispute

The within dispute arises from a claim by five Litter Wardens (‘the Workers’), who are employed by South Dublin County Council (‘the Council’’) for a ‘differential’ payment. Such differential payments are made by the Council to the Workers’ outdoor colleagues for carrying out specific tasks.

The Workers’ Submission

It is submitted on behalf of the Workers that their terms and conditions are aligned with those of General Operatives employed by the Council except that the Workers do not receive the differential payments paid to their outdoor colleagues even though the Workers are regularly required to collaborate with those colleagues on specific tasks such as ‘fly-tipping’ assignments.

In its written submission to the Court, the Union states: “The SDCC Litter Wardens as General Operative related grades are seeking that they are treated equally with their colleagues”. The Union also denies that the within claim is a cost-increasing claim in circumstances where, it is submitted, the differential payments should have been payable to the Workers from when the post of Litter Warden was established in 1997.

The Council’s Submission

It is submitted on behalf of the Council that differentials are paid only in relation to specific tasks and where there is an agreement in place governing their payment for the completion of such tasks. It is further submitted that the Workers perform only tasks that fall fully within the scope of the duties and responsibilities of the Litter Warden role and that they do not, therefore, qualify for payment of a differential.

Discussion and Recommendation

A list of tasks that qualify for a differential payment to workers employed by the Council was opened to the Court. The Union was unable to identify any differential that was applicable to the Workers. The Court, therefore, finds that the within claim is not well-founded and does not recommend concession of the claim.

The Court so recommends.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Alan Haugh
AR	______________________
16 May 2024	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Aidan Ralph, Court Secretary.