INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
CLONMANY ENTERPRISE & DEVELOPMENT LTD
- AND -
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
Chairman: Ms Jenkinson
Employer Member: Mr Grier
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Appropriate salary level.
2. The Union are seeking the application of the rate of pay applicable in the Heritage & Tourism Development Sector of the Community Youth Training Projects, (CTP) for a Senior Development Officer, employed with Clonmany Enterprises & Development Ltd with effect from 25th May 2001 to bring it in line with that paid to Community Employment Supervisors. The worker was employed as a skilled foreman for the last twelve years, and was recently made redundant.
The rate of pay for a CTP Supervisor employed by Clonmany Enterprise & Development Ltd. was the subject of a Labour Court hearing in 2002 and a recommendation LRC 17080 was issued on 6th March 2002. In this case the rate of pay applicable to Community Employment Supervisors was sought. The Court recommended: "Due to the national implications of this claim the Court recommends that the parties should proceed to address the claim as proposed by the industrial relations officer of the Labour Relations Commission in his letter of 20th April, 2001, with an appropriate revised timescale."
On 25th May 2001 the Labour Court issued a recommendation LCR 16825 in respect of Genealogy & Heritage Centres. One of its recommendations was that an examination of the terms and conditions of the claimants be undertaken by an independent third party. It was agreed that Ms Janet Hughes of the Labour Relations Commission would complete an investigation and her report of the 21st March 2002 recommended,the Genealogy & Heritage Managers should receive an increase of pay of 20% with effect from the date of the Labour Court Recommendation 25th May 2001 and that future pay increases should be linked to CTW managers. Any benefits arising to CTW managers would be applied to Genealogy & Heritage Supervisors in accordance with the terms of the Programme for Prosperity & Fairness (PPF).
The Union are seeking the appropriate salary levels as the Genealogy and Heritage Supervisors. The issue could not be resolved at local level. The Union referred the claim to the Labour Court on the 2nd May, 2003 in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 19th February, 2004.
FAS attended the Labour Court Hearing and made the following arguments:
3.1 The funding FAS makes to CTP projects is sourced from the training allocations it received annually from the Exchequer. Changes to elements of Exchequer funded FAS schemes including staff costs must be approved by the Department of Enterprise, Trade & Employment and Finance. Changes cannot be implemented unilaterally by FAS.
2. FAS is not the worker's employer and does not have the authority to increase his rate of pay. The same funding arrangements were made for the worker's employer as for other employers (sponsors) of CTP supervisors.
3. FAS believes that concession of this worker's claim would lead to further claims from the remaining CTP supervisors.
4.1 FAS directly pays the current rate of pay to each sponsoring company together with a top-up for PRSI
2. A Labour Court Recommendation LCR No. 16759 dealt with workers employed by Community Training Workshops and Community Employment Schemes. The Court requested at that time, all parties to the dispute, Employers, FAS and the Unions participate in an investigation by an agreed third party and recommend the pay and conditions of all staff and agree appropriate relationships for the future.
3. The exercise which the employers have failed to implement would have shown the rate of skills required, ie experience, supervisory knowledge and site qualifications.
4. The Union are seeking the application of the rate of pay applicable in the Heritage and Tourism side of Community Training Projects for the worker.
5. The worker's rate of pay when he was made redundant in November 2003, was €390, the rate of pay in the Heritage side for an equivalent positions are €468.96 and CE Supervisors receive €441.60 at the maximum of the scale.
5.1 The company argued that they are 'Employer in name only', it was FAS that made the worker redundant.
The Union has referred a claim on behalf of one Community Youth Training Project Supervisor who had been employed by Clonmany Enterprise & Development Limited until he was made redundant. The claim is for the payment of the rate of pay applicable in the Heritage & Tourism Development Sector of the Community Youth Training Projects with effect from 25th May, 2001, so as to bring it in line with that paid to Community Employment Supervisors.
At the hearing FAS made a statement to the Court pointing out that it was not the employer of the claimant and accordingly has no authority to increase his rate of pay. It stated that the funding provided to Clonmany Enterprise & Development Limited was the same funding as provided by FAS for other employers (sponsors) of CTP supervisors.
In Labour Court Recommendation No: 17080, the Court made the following recommendation:-
- "Due to the national implications of this claim the Court recommends that the parties should proceed to address the claim as proposed by the industrial relations officer of the Labour Relations Commission in his letter of 20th April, 2001, with an appropriate revised timescale."
"It is agreed that Ms. Janet Hughes, if available, will be asked to carry out a comprehensive investigation of the terms and conditions of employment of CTP supervisors, both Heritage and Construction........".
The Court reiterates this recommendation that the pay of CTP supervisors should be the subject of investigation on a national level, and given that the funding arrangements for the enterprise emanates from FAS, the Court recommends that FAS should co-operate with this exercise.
The Court recommends that the outcome of this investigation should apply to the claimant, the subject of this claim
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.