Report from the Partnership Committee following its meeting held on 3 March 2004

Main Discussion Points

Brian McKenna, as Chair, welcomed the Committee and thanked Gerry Hayden for his work as Chair of the previous year.

Minutes of the last meeting
TB asked that under the section 'Matters Arising' and his discussion on the Draft Action Plan that annoyance be changed to anger.

GH asked that under 'UCD Pension Scheme Integration' and in particular the list of his concerns that concern (1) be expanded upon and in particular the reason given.

Matters arising from minutes of last meeting
TM is on sick leave. MF asked that the Committee agree to hold the position of Joint Secretary open until his return. Agreed.

JC queried the status of the comparative study Margaret Ramsay promised at the last meeting in relation to the Integration issue. MF explained that Margaret Agnew had undertaken to do this and it will be circulated as soon as completed.

Pensioners Guide
A discussion was held on whether to send the document to all Pensioners of the University or to limit it to the Pensioners of the last five years. It was felt that limiting the audience will alienate a still vital segment of the University population.

JC referred to the Travel Pass Scheme and mentioned that he had never heard of it beforehand. It should be advertised more widely and included in the Staff manual. RE to organise.

Sustaining Progress (SP)
MF spoke of how the current national wage agreement is the most difficult he has undertaken in his current position. In particular in relation to when and to whom the award applies.

MF explained that a further progress report is required by the PVG before April 30, 2004. This will relate to the progress achieved since December 2003. It needs to demonstrate real and verifiable progress. The priority items are: 1) Sick pay: The Action Plan spoke of a seven day limit on uncertified sick leave in a year; and 2) Rostering: Those members of staff that are in contact with the public are to show progress of working outside the normal 9-5 hours.

MF told the Committee that he is due to meet with SIPTU on the 25 March 2004 to discuss the Action Plan. If there is not sufficient progress MF will refer matter to LRC. This will then be reported in the upcoming Progress Report. Based on this, MF warned that the PVG could defer payment of the next phase of SP (2% due in July) for all grades/ those represented by SIPTU.

MF informed the Committee that the Technicians have not yet reached agreement at National Level and hence no movement on pay awards can be made.

MF then spoke of how the Manual and Craft grades, as covered by Analogue, are now required to agree a separate Action Plan. TB informed the Committee that these grades have received none of the salary increases as promised by Analague. JC, AOC and TB spoke of how they felt hurt and insulted by the process. The rules are constantly changing. MF confirmed that the stalling of the pay awards is occurring at National Level. POR advised they put pressure on their Union to deal with these points at National Level.

TB went on to explain how they were led to believe they were part of the Partnership Committee and they signed up to the then specified requirements. Now the HEA is saying that it is not all-inclusive. TB described the Manual and Craft Workers to be disgruntled.

MF explained that he only discovered that the 3% was being held back in December. Now the HEA has asked for further change requirements. MF spent ten days in talks with the HEA. If the further criteria are signed up to then these grades will receive the 25% of Analogue and 3% of SP.

TB, AOC and JC all spoke about not signing up to the aforementioned Progress Report in order to stall the next phase of SP as a protest. MF questioned their requirement to sign the agreement. HG spoke of how they have always had to before. MF explained that now they are covered by a separate agreement.

The Partnership Committee discussed how there are now two Action Plans, depending on staff category, and this does not sit well under the Partnership philosophy. MF said that this concern could be noted in the introductory note of the next progress report.

Employee Self Service On-Line Payslip
A demonstration of the On-Line Payslip Service ensued.

It is predicted that this service will reduce the number of payslips the Payroll Office is printing by 60%. It was explained to the Committee that this project will be rolled out gradually. It starts with the salaried staff of the Michael Tierney Building. In 12-18 months it is envisaged the system will have been rolled to all salaried staff.

TB pointed out that not all staff have access to computers. POS replied that eventually booths will be located around the campus but that each case will be examined on an individual basis. Pensioners will continue to receive a paper payslip. P60's will continue to be printed, as certain stationary from Revenue is required.

The same security mechanisms are used for the on-line payslip as 24 hour banking, and staff will be issued with a PIN, which can be changed.

The Department of Defense and Enterprise Ireland are examples of other companies who implemented an on-line payslip system.

Any Other Business
JD wants to initiate discussions on the University Crèche.

JC pointed out that there are cars using the Pay & Display Car Park that have UCD Car Parking Stickers and he questioned whether they are paying for the facility. To which it was responded that they are probably paying by the hour. Otherwise they would be clamped. BM spoke of how Intel put a cap on the number of builders that can avail of company car parking. This could be an option due to the level of building that is occurring throughout the University.

Bredagh Moran replaces Robert French on the Partnership Committee and was welcomed to the Committee.

Two meetings to be organised for early and late April.