INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
LOUTH COUNTY COUNCIL
(REPRESENTED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES BOARD)
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Grier
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Date of implementation of night duty allowance for shift workers.
2. The dispute before the Court relates to the date from which the application of an agreement made under the PCW Special Award (Phase II) for the payment of a revised Shift Allowance should apply to full-time firefighters employed by Louth Local Authorities at the stations in Drogheda and Dundalk.
Management agreed to pay the allowance from the date the claim was first referred to the Labour Relations Commission in March 2005. The Union were not in agreement and wanted the allowance to be payable from the 1st July 1998 "in line with the Dublin Settlement".
The dispute 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 24th August 2006, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 14th February, 2007.
3. 1.The Union maintain that in not paying the night duty allowance from 1st July 1998, Management have not fulfilled the agreement made with the Union in July 1998 ("the Dublin Settlement").
2. The entirety of the PCW Special Pay Award included increases to be paid on rent allowances as opposed to basic pay. As our members are not in receipt of a rent allowancethey are not receiving the full agreement.
4. 1. The claim for the night duty allowance is a contemporaneous claim. Management are willing to apply the allowance but only in line with the date the claim was lodged with the LRC, that is to March 2005.
2. The only element of the "Dublin Settlement" applicable to Dundalk and Drogheda was the percentage pay increase in line with the historic pay relationship (£1.00 differential).
The Court notes that the only issue now in dispute between the parties relates to the question of backpay.
It is noted that the Union made its claim in 2004. This is the date from which retrospection would normally apply.
However, in the circumstances of this case the Court recommends that the allowance be retrospected to November 2003.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
26th February, 2007______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.