Labour Court Database
File Number: AEP8612
Case Number: DEP871
Section / Act: S8(1)AD
Parties: CITY OF DUBLIN V.E.C. - and - IMETU;FWUI;ITGWU
Appeal, by the V.E.C. against Equality Officer's Recommendation No. E.P. 13/1986 concerning a claim by 154 female cleaners/attendants for equal basic pay with male general operatives, on the grounds that they are performing like work in terms of section 3 of the Anti-Discrimination (Pay) Act, 1974.
20. In view of my conclusions in the preceding paragraphs
and having regard to section 8(5) of the Act I recommend that
each of the claimants be paid the same hourly basic pay as
the general operatives with effect from 6th March, 1982 or
from the date of recruitment where later. Assimilation onto
the general operative scale should be on the basis of
(The claimants involved were named by the Equality Officer).
4. The V.E.C. appealed the Equality Officer's recommendation to
the Labour Court under Section 8 of the Anti-Discrimination (Pay),
Act, 1974 on 25th November, 1986. The Court heard the appeal on
6th February, 1987. The written submissions to the Court, are
attached as appendices to this Determination. The parties
enlarged on these submissions at the hearing.
5. The Court has given careful consideration to the five points
of appeal set out in letter dated 25th November, 1986 from the
City of Dublin VEC, as expanded in the written submission to the
Court and further developed at the hearing on 6th February, 1987.
The Court also took account of the Union's response to the points
of appeal and to the report of the Equality Officer (EP 13/1986).
The Court determines as follows:
(1) The Court is satisfied that the Equality Officer is correct
in her findings that the claimants perform like work with the
general operatives, within the meaning of Section 3(c) of the
Anti-Discrimination (Pay) Act, 1974.
(2) The Court finds no evidence to substantiate the claim that
the Equality Officer failed to take adequate account of the
points made by the City of Dublin VEC.
(3) The Court does not accept that the Equality Officer went
outside her brief in granting retrospection in accordance
with provisions of Section 8(5) of the Act. The claim was
lodged in 1981 and the Unions requested an investigation of
the dispute by the Equality Officer in March, 1982. The
Court agrees with the Union's submission that the Act confers
the right to retrospection once the case is proven and limits
that retrospection to 3 years from the date the dispute was
referred to the Equality Officer.
(4) The claimants are all employed in the City of Dublin which
clearly comes within the definition of the same "place" as
set out in Section 2 of the Act of 1974.
(5) The Court agrees with the Equality Officer's findings in
relation to the VECs contention that the different rates are
paid on grounds other than sex.
Accordingly, the Court upholds the recommendation of the Equality
Oficer and rejects the appeal.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
AEP8612 THE LABOUR COURT DEP1/87
EP131986 ANTI-DISCRIMINATION (PAY) ACT, 1974
DETERMINATION NO. DEP1/87
Parties: CITY OF DUBLIN VOCATIONAL EDUCATION COMMITTEE
ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY FOUR FEMALE CLEANERS/ATTENDANTS
(Represented by the Federated Workers' Union of Ireland, the Irish
Municipal Employees' Trade Union and the Irish Transport and
General Workers' Union).
1. Appeal, by the V.E.C. against Equality Officer's
Recommendation No. E.P. 13/1986 concerning a claim by 154 female
cleaners/attendants for equal basic pay with male general
operatives, on the grounds that they are performing like work in
terms of section 3 of the Anti-Discrimination (Pay) Act, 1974.
2. The claimants and the male comparators concerned in this
dispute are employed by the City of Dublin Vocational Education
Committee in 30 different centers which include 28 schools and
colleges, the V.E.C. Head Office and the Buildings Maintenance
Section. The claimants are classified as cleaners/attendants and
the male comparators are classified as general operatives. All
cleaners/attendants are female and all general operatives are
male. The general operatives have a 13 point scale ranging from
#126.78 to #137.04 after 11 1/2 years. The female cleaners/
attendants have a 15 point scale ranging from #106.43 to #107.59
after 14 years. The Irish Municipal Employees' Trade Union, the
Irish Transport and General Workers' Union and the Federated
Workers' Union of Ireland requested the Equality Officer on 6th
March, 1985 to investigate the dispute concerning the claim on
behalf of female cleaners/attendants for equal pay with general
3. Following an investigation of the matter, the Equality
Officer, on 16th October, 1986, issued the following conclusions
11. The V.E.C. and the Unions agree that the claimants
involved in the dispute here concerned all perform like work
with each other in terms of section 3 of the Act. In
addition, the parties nominated 12 work centres where they
were satisfied that the work performed by the claimants and
the male comparators constituted a representative cross
section of that performed by the claimants and the males in
all the schools, colleges etc. in which they are employed.
Having examined the work performed by each of the claimants
in these centres I concur with the view of the V.E.C. and the
Unions that as between themselves the claimants perform like
work with each other in terms of section 3(c) of the Act. On
the basis of the submissions of the parties I am also
satisfied, therefore, that each of the claimants involved in
the dispute, including those employed in the other centres
not visited by me, perform like work with each other in terms
of section 3(c) of the Act.
12. The claimants in the centres I visited perform general
duties connected with cleaning, canteen work or attending to
teachers' requirements in home economics classes. Variations
in their duties depend on the direction of the Principal of
the school in question. For example, in some schools the
claimants provide canteen facilities viz light meals for
teachers, in others they merely make tea or coffee for the
teachers, while in others again they provide light canteen
facilities for the teachers and students. In some schools