INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Grier
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Non-payment of Productivity Payment/Benchmarking to Advocates.
2. This dispute is in relation to a claim concerning the non-payment of Productivity / Benchmarking pay increase to a group of approximately 30 Advocates employed by various VEC's and Community Training Centres (CTC's). The increases were conceded to Instructors in CTC's with whom the Union claim there is a pay-relativity set out in a FÁS circular (March '01).
FÁS have stated that the Advocates are on similar pay scales to the Instructors but that there is no established pay relationship. FÁS have also stated that they are not the employer of the Advocates and that the pay of Advocates is a matter for the individual employers concerned. The employers are grant aided by FÁS.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 12th October, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act,1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 20th January, 2005.
3. 1. Our Advocate members are within the Instructor Grade and this pay relationship is defined by the 2001 FÁS Mainstreaming Advocacy document.
2. There is no separate Advocates scale of pay and remuneration structure agreed or otherwise.
4. 1.Advocate salary guidelines are not, insofar as FÁS is aware, linked to CTC Instructor grades or to any other Public Service grades.
2. Salary guidelines were drawn up for Advocates in 2000 and the guidelines are updated in line with general round increases.
3. Advocates are not Public Servants, neither have they any pay relationship with any public service grade.
Based on the submissions of the parties and on the information provided the Court is satisfied that Advocates have an established pay relationship with the CTC instructors. Accordingly, the Court recommends that the Union's claim be conceded.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
25th January, 2005______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.