INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
GALWAY COUNTY COUNCIL
(REPRESENTED BY LGMA)
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Hayes
Employer Member: Ms Cryan
Worker Member: Mr Shanahan
1. Hearing Arising From LCR 20683
2. This case concerns a dispute between Galway County Council and SIPTU in relation to proposed changes to terms and conditions of employment of retained fire-fighter's. The specifics of the dispute were recommended on by the Court in Labour Court Recommendation LCR20683. The Court recommended that outstanding issues be the subject of further negotiations between the parties and matters not agreed could be referred back to the Court if necessary. The dispute was the subject of a further conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached the matter was referred to the Court in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 22nd January 2015.
3 1 The issues currently in dispute between the parties form part of a circular letter issued on 4th December 2014. As this is now an issue to be dealt with at national level the Union contends that it cannot currently be dealt with in isolation.
4 1 The issues in dispute pre date the issuing of the circular letter and therefore can be dealt with by the Court. Management does not accept that the issues should form part of the national discussions currently underway.
This matter was originally addressed by the Court in LCR 20683. The Court recommended that the parties engage on the outstanding issue and revert back to it for a definitive recommendation after 12 weeks on issues outstanding between them. Talks between the parties ensued but no agreement was reached.
In the interim the National Director for Fire and Emergency Management issued Circular Letter Fire 01/15 “Keeping Communities Safe – Good Practice Note 2.6 Management of Attendance of Retained Crews (version 3.9 4thDecember 2014). This circular letter directly impacts on the issues before the Court.
The Union side argued that the issues raised in the circular letter had national implications and could not be dealt with in isolation in the context of the current case. Management argued that the issues raised in the case before the Court predated the issue of the Circular Letter and were not affected by it.
The Court has considered all of the issues raised in this case. The Court finds that there is a sufficient connection between the Circular Letter and its implications for staff numbers for it to proceed with caution in the context of the matter before it.
Accordingly the Court recommends that the parties revert to the Court after the issues raised in the Circular Letter are resolved through national discussions that are currently ongoing.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
28th April 2015______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.