FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MEATH COUNTY COUNCIL (REPRESENTED BY LGMSB) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION UNION OF CONSTRUCTION, ALLIED TRADES AND TECHNICIANS SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Hearing arising from LCR19703.
BACKGROUND:
2. This case arises from a previous Labour Court hearing and the provisions of LCR19703. Meath County Council (represented by the LGMSB) and the Unions are in dispute in relation to Management's decision to withdraw the payment of locally agreed allowances and premium payments, the payment of appropriate compensation where regular rostered overtime has ceased and the alleged failure of management to adhere to the 1997 nationally agreed procedures for the engagement of private contractors.
In LCR19703, the Court recommended that;
- The allowances in dispute be retrospectively re-instated and that further discussions take place at local level in relation to the elimination of the duties for which the allowances/premium payments were previously paid.
- A buy out of the allowances at one and a half times the annual loss should be paid over three instalments (31st December 2010, 31st December 2011, and 31st December, 2012).
- Management should strictly comply with the provisions of the nationally agreed procedures on engaging private contractors and
- Unresolved issues relating to the elimination of the relevant duties be referred back to the Court for a definitive Recommendationif necessary.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court arises from Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703. The Recommendation dealt with a number of issues before it and recommended that discussions should take place between the parties on the remaining issues and be completed by 31st January 2010 with any outstanding issues being referred back to the Court for a definitive Recommendation. While some progress was made a number of issues remain outstanding.
Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703 recommended that
- “In circumstances where there is a discontinuation of duties/functions performed a buy-out of one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss of the associated allowances/payments should be made in three equal instalments, as follows: -
- -one third from 31st December 2010
- -one third from 31st December 2011
-one third from 31st December 2012”
- -one third from 31st December 2011
- -one third from 31st December 2010
These issues now referred back to the Court were considered at a hearing held on 29th April 2010 at which both sides presented comprehensive submissions on their respective positions.
The Unions stated that they entered into discussions as recommended by the Court and in an effort to address the Council’s financial difficulties they made an offer to the Council that it could suspend payment of the driving allowance for one year without compensation and they agreed to a buyout of the driving/heating allowance on condition that the commitment to provide the necessary equipment was put in place. They pointed out their concerns over the Council’s intention to completely cease allowances.
The Unions sought compensation for the discontinuation of regular and rostered overtime worked at Br� Na B�inne for over 10 years.
The Council stated that it implemented Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703 in accordance with its provisions and initiated discussions with the relevant trade unions in an effort to resolve the outstanding matters by the recommended deadline of 31st January 2010. It offered to extend the buy-out arrangements to the outstanding issues.
The Council submitted that due to its current economic difficulties it was necessary to withdraw various local allowances and replace them with nationally agreed allowances. Furthermore, it explained that requirements in certain cases for work to be carried out at all had ceased and in other cases work outside of the normal working day would no longer be required. It also stated that workers would no longer be required to report for work at various different work locations and instead workers would be required to report at their designated work base at their normal starting time. In an effort to address the loss of earnings which may result from these proposed changes the Council offered to buy out the allowance by the payment of compensation for the annual loss incurred from 1st February 2010in line with the compensation formula recommended by the Court in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703.
The Council stated that as it had reinstated the allowances as recommended by the Court and was continuing to pay them despite the Court’s recommendation that all matters should be completed by 31st January 2010. Therefore, it submitted that in calculating compensation due cognisance should be taken of these payments.
Having considered the submissions and the comments made at the hearing the Court notes that it is not the intention of the Council to completely cease allowances which had been operated on a regular and rostered basis as feared by the Unions but in many cases to replace them with nationally agreed allowances and to pay compensation for any losses incurred on the basis of the Court’s recommended formula.
Accordingly, the Court makes the following recommendation:
- (i) County Council Allowances/Payments:-
Meal Allowance, Meal and Tea Allowance, Eating-on-Site and Tea Allowance
The Court recommends that these allowances should be eliminated and replaced with the national eating-on-site allowance. A buy-out of one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss should be paid in line with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703.
Call-Out Allowances
- The Unions sought to have the national agreement on emergency on-call applied to the General Operatives who provide an on-call service yet do not receive the terms of the national agreement. The Council stated that the national on-call emergency agreement only requires Overseers to be on-call for emergencies.
The Court notes that the Council confirmed that the national on-call emergency agreement is already in existence in the Council and that there was no proposal to eliminate/alter this allowance. Therefore, the Court is not satisfied that a case exists for departing from the national agreement and recommends accordingly.
- The Council proposed to eliminate driving allowances and to require employees to report to their appointed work base at their designated start time instead of at various different work locations. Therefore, in the circumstances the Court sees justification for the elimination of the allowances and recommends that a buy-out of one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss should be paid in line with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703.
Driving/Heating Allowance
The Unions proposed to accept a buyout of the driving/heating allowance on condition that the Council commit to provide the necessary equipment. On the basis that the Council no longer has a requirement for the basis for paying this allowance the Court recommends the elimination of the allowance and recommends that a buy-out of one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss should be paid in line with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703.
- The Council has proposed that clean-up will now be carried out during the normal working hours. Therefore, in the circumstances the Court sees justification for the elimination of the allowances and recommends that a buyout of one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss should be paid in line with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703.
- This claim relates to one employee redeployed from Kilmoon to Navan as a result of the closure of the Kilmoon depot. The Unions stated that the employee concerned has significant additional travelling since his redeployment. The Unions sought the application of a Clare Agreement and referred to an appeal decision before the Court concerning Leitrim County Council AD0287. The Council stated that the employee concerned must report to a designated base and offered to buy-out the allowance at one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss to apply from 1st February 2010 in line with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703. Having considered the specific circumstances of this case and the various cases referred to the Court sees no reason to alter the Council’s offer and recommends that it should be accepted by him in full and final settlement of this claim.
- The Unions sought to retain this allowance with respect to two craftsmen in the Housing Squad which is paid for certain elements of flexibility given, e.g. no canteen facilities and carrying Council equipment in private cars. The Council stated that the two remaining craftsmen in receipt of this allowance have the use of Council vans. It stated that they will be redeployed and it proposed to eliminate the allowance with a buy-out payment. In the circumstances the Court recommends that a buy-out of one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss should be paid for the elimination of the allowance to the craftsmen and this should be paid in line with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703.
The Unions stated that the five drivers who applied for jobs were in the Environment Maintenance Section and were informed that the rate of pay for the post was that of Driver/Plant Operator and that normal travel time before and after standard hours would apply, as per the advertisement. The Council now states that it proposes to eliminate travel time allowances and to require employees to report to their appointed work base at their designated start time instead of at various different work locations. Therefore, in the circumstances the Court sees justification for the elimination of the allowances and recommends that a buy-out of one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss should be paid in line with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703.
Br� na B�inne
The Unions sought compensation for the discontinuation of regular and rostered overtime worked for over ten years at Br� na B�inne. The Council stated that the practice of coming in early had developed without any formal agreement and consequently sought to discontinue the practice without compensation. The Court sees justification for the payment of compensation in these circumstances and accordingly recommends that a buy-out of one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss should be paid in line with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703.
(ii) Town Councils’ Allowances/ Payments:-
- These allowances apply for operating certain types of machinery. The Council proposed to eliminate these allowances, pay a buy out allowance and replace them with appropriate acting up payment for the undertaking of such duties. The Court sees justification in the Council’s proposals. In the circumstances the Court recommends that a buy-out of one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss should be paid for the elimination of these allowances and that this should be paid in line with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703.
- In relation to the “Green Machine” Allowance the Court understands that this is paid not in the form of an allowance but as a specific rate of pay. The Council stated that the rate being paid in the three Town Councils in Meath is not the nationally agreed rate for the job i.e. the Light Equipment Operator’s rate and it proposed to introduce this nationally agreed rate and pay compensation for any losses which may occur. The Court recommends that the current situation should continue to apply for those in receipt of the Green Machine rate and that they should retain the rate in its current form on a red-circled basis and recommends that the nationally agreed rate should be introduced for new recruits.
- The Council proposed to break the link between the Town Councils and the County Council in relation to Winter Gritting and instead proposed that overtime payments for winter gritting would only be made when the gritting operation is actually carried out or when staff were specifically asked to be on ‘stand-by’ for gritting operations on a particular day by the relevant Area/Town Engineer. The Unions objected to this proposal and sought to have ‘custom and practice’ honoured. In the circumstances the Court cannot find in favour of the continuation of a practice where employees in Town Councils are paid for winter gritting where the work is not actually carried out. Therefore, the Court recommends that the proposed new arrangements as outlined in a letter to SIPTU dated 13th October 2009 should be accepted by the Unions.
Sewer Allowance
- The Unions sought the application of an agreement reached in South Dublin County Council whereby allowances paid as overtime for additional duties have been regularised and converted into recognised allowances. The Council proposed to eliminate the sewer allowance and replace it with an appropriate acting up payment for the undertaking of such duties. As there will be no loss, it did not propose to pay a buy-out compensation payment.
The Court does not see that the South Dublin County Council is directly relevant to this claim and is of the view that the Council’s proposal to pay an acting-up payment when the job is undertaken is a reasonable proposition in the circumstances. Therefore the Court does not uphold the Unions’ claim.
Weekend Clean-Up Allowance in Trim and Navan
The Council stated that these duties have ceased. It proposed to buy-out the allowance on the basis of one-and-a-half times’ the annual loss to apply from 1st February 2010 and paid in line with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703. The Court notes that the Unions were agreeable to a buy-out of this allowance in accordance with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703. Therefore, the Court recommends that the Weekend Clean-Up Allowance in Trim and Navan should be bought out in accordance with the payment schedule as detailed in Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703, as sought by the Unions.
Engagement of Private Contractors
Labour Court Recommendation No: 19703 recommended that“the Council adheres strictly to the nationally agreed procedures under the 1997 Agreement for the engagement of private contractors.”
The Unions submitted that the Council had breached the Agreement since the Court issued its Recommendation.
The Council conceded that due to emergency situations surrounding water leakages last December/January that it was necessary to engage private contractors in a hurry and therefore it did not have the opportunity to engage with the Union Group in line with the 1997 agreement. It stated that in accordance with its previous commitment a Senior Manager had been appointed with responsibility for liaising with the Union Group when appointing private contractors and it gave a further commitment to abide by the procedure.
The Court recommends that the Council should reinforce its commitment to the Union Group that it will communicate fully with them when it intends to engage private contractors. Such a commitment should be given in writing within a period of two weeks.
Other Matters
Drivers’ Allowance in Trim Town Council/Kells/Navan
The Unions maintained that there is a retrospective payment due in respect of the “Drivers’ Allowance in Trim Town Council/Kells/Navan” on foot of an amalgamation agreement of 2003. The Court recommends that further local discussions should take place to finalise this matter.
Tea Allowance
The Unions sought the application of a “Tea Allowance” to three Foremen in each Town Council retrospective to the amalgamation agreement of 2003. As this was a new claim, one which had not formed part of the original hearing, the Court makes no recommendation on this issue.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
03rd June 2010______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.