LCR16057

FULL RECOMMENDATION CD/98/463 RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR16057 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : ST. AGNES' PRIMARY SCHOOL - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu

SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the wages of a worker.


BACKGROUND:

2. The dispute concerns the remuneration of a worker whose responsibilities include the dividing up and circulation of food (sandwiches/buns and milk) for the schoolchildren's mid-morning break. The worker took up duties in the school in 1979, succeeding her mother who had performed the task for a number of years previously. The Union, on behalf of the worker, who works 1 hour per day, 5 days per week, sought an increase in her rate of pay from £4.11 per hour to £5 per hour, the application of various increases under the national agreements along with the provision of wage slips and clear identification of her hourly rate and number of hours worked per day. The School, which is designated as a disadvantaged school by the Department of Education and Science, is a participant in the Dublin Corporation-operated free meals scheme. The School receives an administration fee from the Corporation which is linked to the School's average attendance and this fee is paid in its entirety to the worker. The last increase, from £3.62 to £4.11, arose in 1994 when the average number of school meals moved up a tier, i.e., from 301-400 to 401-500. The School's position is that it would not be in a position to top up the payment from its own scant resources adding that it was open to question if the worker was actually an employee of the school. Agreement was not reached by the parties following local discussions and the dispute was referred to the Labour Court, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, on the 16th of October, 1998. The Court carried out its investigation on the 30th of November, 1998.

UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

1. The worker is entitled to a statement of her earnings setting out her hourly rate and the number of hours worked. The rate of £20.55 per week is meaningless unless it can be related to her hours. Furthermore, the rate does not appear to be related to any internal or external comparator thereby allowing it to be moved in line with other pay movements.

2. The terms of the PCW, the PESP and P2000 do not appear to have been applied to the worker's pay. Accordingly, she is seeking the establishment of a rate of pay that would attract the terms of the national agreements. The most appropriate way of achieving this would be through local discussions. Failing that, a rate of £5.00 per hour would be sought, being the amount submitted by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions as the appropriate level for the minimum wage.

SCHOOL'S ARGUMENTS:

1. The payment received from the Corporation is a fixed amount over which the school has no control. That sum is paid over in full to the worker and the school does not have the financial resources available to add to it. In no other school is the amount received from the Corporation topped up by the school management.

2. If the Union seeks to have the payment increased, it should do so by persuading the Corporation to increase the amount granted to participating schools.


RECOMMENDATION:

The Court notes the written and oral submissions made by the parties and, in the first instance, recommends that this claimant must be considered as an employee of the school and treated accordingly.

The Court also recommends that the rate of pay of £4.11 per day is not unreasonable for the duties she performs, as the claimant is required to work only one hour per day. This rate is the amount paid by Dublin Corporation for the grant-in-aid scheme. However, it has not increased for a period of four years. Therefore, the Court recommends that it should be increased from 1st March, 1999, in line with national wage agreements.

In the meantime, the Court urges the parties to co-operate jointly in having discussions with the Corporation, with a view to increasing the grant-in-aid payments in line with national wage agreements. This is being recommended because of the direct link between that which is paid for the grant-in-aid scheme and the pay of this employee and indeed of other employees in similar situations in other schools.



Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Caroline Jenkinson
21st December, 1998.______________________
MK/BCDeputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.