INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL
- AND -
IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION
Chairman: Mr Hayes
Employer Member: Ms Doyle
Worker Member: Ms Tanham
1. Retention of Acting-up allowance for certain workers for a period of 18 months.
2. This dispute concernsa claim by the Union for the payment ofan acting up allowancefor a period of 18 months after the substantive post has been filled and the employee that held the acting position is unsuccessful in the competition. Management rejected the claim.This 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 27th March 2015, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 14th May 2015.
3. 1. The Union argues that the majority of the allowances at issue were approved prior to the Moratorium on Public Service Recruitment.
- 2.The Union arguesthat workers in Dublin City Councilshould be treated in the same way as their colleagues in South Dublin County Council and Clare County Council. In both of those cases workers that were unsuccessful in competitions of fill posts in which they had been acting, were paid the acting allowance for 18 months as a form of compensation to transition them back to their substantive posts and salary levels.
3.The Union's goal has been to maximise as many promotional opportunities as possible for members through the regularisation process in Dublin City Council.
4. 1. Management does not see any basis to continue the payment of the acting allowance to any employee that fails to secure appointment to a post to which they had been appointed in an acting capacity. Neither does management see any merit in a claim for compensation for the loss of the acting allowance in such cases.
2.The regularisation of staff in acting positions has been addressed by management on an ongoing basis in a range of ways. In doing so it argues that it has fully complied with all relevant Departmental Circulars and Agreements with the relevant trade unions.
3. Managementargues that the payment of the allowance or compensation is not warranted in a case where (a) the post has been filled by another candidate following a formal competition for the job or (b) the post is no has been abolished (e.g. due to restructuring)
Having carefully considered the submissions of both parties to this dispute the Court finds that the parties entered into an agreement at national level regarding the manner in which the Local Authority sector would deal with the issue of long term vacancies that had been filled in an acting capacity because of the effect of the financial cutbacks and the employment embargo. That agreement made no provision for compensation for long term actors that were not successful in competitions for vacant posts identified and filled in the relevant local authority. As Management is complying fully with the terms of that agreement the Court does not recommend concession of the Union's claim.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
28th May 2015Deputy Chairman
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Clodagh O'Reilly, Court Secretary.