Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90578 Case Number: LCR13119 Section / Act: S67 Parties: KILKENNY COUNTY COUNCIL - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the grading of a caretaker.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
finds no basis on which it could justify recommending concession
of the Union's claim which it accordingly rejects.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90578 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13119
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: KILKENNY COUNTY COUNCIL
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the grading of a caretaker.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned was appointed to the post of caretaker
for the Graiguenamanagh Health Centre/Library/Public Convenience
on 7th March, 1988. The work involves caretaking the Library and
Health Centre and maintaining the public conveniences. The latter
duty also requires the worker to open and close the public toilets
at weekends. The worker's rate of pay was determined in line with
the national rate paid to Road Gangers, which ranges from #162.82
to #173.33 per week, with effect from 1st April, 1990. The Union
is claiming that the worker has been incorrectly graded and that
the ganger has fixed working hours while this worker has no fixed
hours and his job is more responsible and demanding. The Union's
position is that the correct comparison is with the Water and
Sewerage Caretaker, Grade 5 the rate of pay for which ranges from
#185.68 to #207.16 per week (w.e.f 1st April, 1990). Also, that
the maintenance of the public conveniences is outside normal work
and the worker should therefore receive an allowance of #30 per
week which is paid to water and sewerage caretakers when
performing such duties. This claim was rejected by the Council on
the basis that the worker was aware of the conditions of
employment etc. when he applied for the post and that the rate of
pay fixed took into account the requirement to open and close the
public toilets at the weekends. On 25th January, 1990 the matter
was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court.
Conciliation conferences were held on 27th March, 1990 and 4th
September, 1990 at which agreement was not reached and on 28th
September, 1990 the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. The Court investigated the
dispute on 13th November, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The County Council established this position of caretaker
without consultation with the Union on the pay rates or
allowances. The worker is paid at a scale which is also
applicable to road gangers to whom his work is comparable,
according to the County Council. This rate of pay is also the
rate paid to water and sewerage caretakers, grade 2. This
worker's job is not comparable to a road ganger's job. The
ganger works on fixed hours while this worker does not. The
job of the worker concerned is much more responsible and
demanding. If the worker's hours were fixed the correct
comparison would be with the Rural Road Overseer. As the
worker's hours are not fixed the correct comparison is with
the Water and Sewerage Caretaker, Grade 5 which is the same as
the Rural Road Overseer (details supplied to the Court).
2. While the payment of the Water and Sewerage Caretaker
Grade 5 rate would compensate the worker for his normal work,
maintenance of the public convenience is outside of this and
water and sewerage caretakers who perform such duties receive
additional payments. The local water and sewerage caretaker
has been offered #30 per week to maintain the public
convenience while this worker is on leave. There is no reason
why this worker should not receive the same. The worker is
already paid on a water and sewerage caretakers scale of pay,
Grade 2. It will not cause any problems with the nationally
negotiated grades were he to be regraded to Water and Sewerage
Caretaker, Grade 5, which regrading is justified in view of
his duties and responsibilities and should be effective from
the date of his employment. The worker should also be paid a
weekly allowance of #30 for maintaining the public
convenience.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker was aware of the conditions of employment,
duties of the office and rate of pay applying to the post, at
the time he applied for the post (details supplied to the
Court). The Council is satisfied that the Caretaker's post is
properly graded at the level of pay similar to that paid to a
road ganger. This rate was considered adequate to compensate
for the unsocial hours worked at weekends in complying with
the requirement of opening and closing the public toilets.
The Council is concerned that a worker, who was aware of the
conditions of employment and the duties of the post and who
accepted the rate of pay prescribed should seek to vary the
terms of his employment by alleging that the post should carry
a higher grading. There would be serious repercussions in the
local service if this claim was conceded and the claim should
be rejected.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
finds no basis on which it could justify recommending concession
of the Union's claim which it accordingly rejects.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court,
Evelyn Owens
__11th__December,__1990. ___________________
U. M. / M. F. Deputy Chairman