Industrial Tribunal rules on union representation at University of Malta

On 8 January 2007, the Industrial Tribunal ruled that the University of Malta should include the University of Malta Academic Staff Association (UMASA) in all industrial relations discussions with the Malta Union of Teachers, but stopped short of assigning sole recognition to UMASA.

Industrial Tribunal decision

In March 2004, the University of Malta Academic Staff Association (UMASA) requested that it should have sole representation for academic staff at the University of Malta (UoM).This request was not acceded to because of objections from the Malta Union of Teachers (MUT), which was, up until then, the trade union with sole recognition for collective bargaining purposes at UoM. The issue was taken to the Industrial Tribunal, which, on 8 January 2007, instructed UoM to include UMASA in all industrial relations discussions with MUT; however, the tribunal stopped short of assigning sole recognition to UMASA.

MUT can now no longer claim sole recognition at UoM and, even more importantly, it has now been established that different working conditions can and should apply to UoM academic staff, thus institutionalising a distinction between the UoM and Junior College academics. The Junior College is a post-secondary educational institution, set up in 1995 as part of UoM, following the government’s decision to transfer the responsibilities of pre-university education to UoM.

Distinct occupational category

The Industrial Tribunal established that the working conditions of UoM’s academic staff who are attached to faculties, institutes and research centres qualify them to be recognised as a ‘distinct occupational category’ to those working at the Junior College. The origins of this nomenclature date back to the late 1970s when the tribunal distinguished the non-industrial employees of Simonds Farsons Cisk in the same way. This enabled the Union Impjegati Industrijali Simonds Farsons Cisk to negotiate a distinct collective agreement for its members.

Once this precedent had been set, the Industrial Tribunal has had little choice but to recognise similar, splinter trade unions in the course of the last 30 years, such as the Union of Cabin Crew Malta, the Airline Pilots Association of Malta (ALPA), the Professional Officers Unions at the telecommunications provider Maltacom and at the energy supplier Enemalta, as well as the Union for Legal Graduates at the bank HSBC Group. The criteria for recognising a distinct occupational category status have been consistently applied ever since, despite the presence in most cases of a much larger trade union representing the majority of employees with the same employer.

Groundbreaking decision

The latest decision by the Industrial Tribunal is unique in at least two related respects. Firstly, it constitutes the first time that the splinter union (UMASA) at a working establishment – in this case, UoM – is probably larger in terms of membership than the general union (MUT) which has enjoyed undisputed sole recognition at UoM for some 25 years. This therefore endangers the status of MUT as a bargaining agent at UoM. The tribunal decision effectively obliges MUT to include UMASA in any deliberations affecting the employment conditions of the academic staff at UoM.

Nevertheless, a second aspect of the case concerns the fact that the Industrial Tribunal did not grant sole recognition to UMASA for the ‘distinct occupational category’ that the union has successfully argued into recognition. The original dispute which was referred to the tribunal came about following an inability to determine clearly who was working only or mainly at the Junior College; who was working only or mainly at the faculties, institutes and research centres of UoM; and how other academics should be considered, or whether they should be considered at all.

However, this matter is rather problematic and it seems that the Industrial Tribunal has decided to abandon any attempt at resolving this issue. Admittedly, this is the first time in Malta that the ‘distinct occupational category’ has not been sharply and unambiguously differentiated from the group from which it has broken away.

Commentary

Perhaps the most important detail of this landmark Industrial Tribunal decision is that UoM now has no further excuses to postpone negotiations for a new collective agreement. UoM has managed to delay any collective bargaining for almost three years by its refusal to recognise UMASA. In the interests of expediency, MUT and UMASA would do well to agree to cooperate in advancing the negotiation process in the near future. Enough energy has been spent in deliberating on what differentiates the UoM academic staff from the Junior College personnel. It will be up to UMASA and MUT to reach an agreement that identifies these differences in their conditions of work in the context of a new – and long overdue – collective agreement.

Godfrey Baldacchino, Centre for Labour Studies