SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
APPLUS INSPECTION SERVICES IRELAND
- AND -
600 VEHICLE INSPECTORS & CENTRE ADMIN
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
1.Introduction of New Category of Worker
1. There is a lack of appropriate qualifications for ISP.
2. The introduction of an ISP would not promote accountability and transparency.
3. The introduction of an ISP would have an impact on members’ terms and conditions of employment.
4. The impact on current operation of the introduction of an ISP has not been fully explored by the company.
1. There is a lack of testing availability of NCT services which is not due to the COVID-19 pandemic but, rather, due to a lack of qualified mechanics throughout Europe.
2. The Company proposes to introduce a new category of worker (ISP) to alleviate these pressures.
3. The Company proposes to offer significant improvements in productivity bonus payments as compensation.
4. The introduction of the ISP model will result in improved road safety, a protection of the terms and security of employment of staff into the future and a better work-life balance.
To address the concerns of the Workers and to facilitate the trial proceeding, the Court recommends that the parties make a formal agreement within a matter of a short number of weeks from the date of this Recommendation, within which the Employer should give the following undertakings;
The start and finish dates for the recommended trial period should be included in the agreement.
To facilitate the trial period, the Court recommends that Inspection Support Personnel be engaged on fixed term contracts, at least initially.
At the end of the trial period, the Court recommends that a joint review be undertaken by the parties. This review should be completed within six weeks. The purpose of the review should be to identify any Union concerns highlighted by the trial period that could prevent this proposed approach being made more permanent.
If there are issues between the parties that cannot be resolved at that point, the Court recommends that the parties utilise the assistance of the Workplace Relations Commission.
The Court recommends that the existing productivity bonus scheme, which predates the proposals to recruit Inspection Support Personnel, remain in place and that the parties enter into parallel discussions regarding plans to enhance and improve that scheme for the future.
The Court recommends that the Employer provide vouchers of €250 in value to each member of staff in the centres that participate in the pilot exercise.
The Court notes the difficulties being encountered by the Employer in recruiting suitably qualified mechanics and recommends that the Employer engage with SOLAS, in consultation with the Union, in order to determine if an acceptable solution can be found to this problem for the medium to long term.
The above recommendations are a ‘package’ and are designed to be acted upon as such. The Court notes that attempts by either party to pick and choose elements of the proposals will most likely lead to the credibility of the ‘package’ as a potential solution to the issue before the Court being called into question. Accordingly, the Court wishes it to be noted that these recommendations are intended to be treated and implemented together as a whole.
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Nuria de Cos Lara, Court Secretary.