The Association of Secondary Teachers in Ireland's standing committee yesterday voted by a margin of 12 to 8 to reject a Labour Court recommendation issued earlier this week.
The court had instructed the ASTI to "get its house in order", and was sharply critical of the union's treatment of staff in its Dublin office.
The court said workers in the ASTI head office should be entitled to operate in a workplace where they can get on with their jobs without the constant fear or threat from elected individuals who would appear to have no direct line of responsibility.
SIPTU last night labelled the ASTI decision an "appalling insult" to the staff of the ASTI and to the court.
However, the ASTI agreed to comply with the court's request that it should pay outstanding expenses which had been withheld from staff, although it says it is making these payments on a "without prejudice" basis.
Responding to the decision, a spokeswoman for SIPTU said that the court had given the ASTI two opportunities to attend a court hearing, both of which were refused. "The issue was never about money - it was about the ASTI as an employer behaving in an acceptable manner towards their employees," she said. "It is untenable for a trade union employer to snub the Labour Court in this way.
"Rejection by the standing committee of the recommendation - after 11 hours' deliberation over two days - is an appalling insult to the staff of the ASTI and to the Labour Court."
The unions representing head office staff, SIPTU and the NUJ will meet next week to decide their response to the ASTI move, but it seems certain that the vote will trigger industrial action by administrative and press office staff at the union's headquarters.
Last night ASTI president Mr Pat Cahill said the union had voted to reject the court's recommendation because the court "had only heard one side of the argument". "On legal advice," he said, "the ASTI had been unable to attend the Labour Court hearing because of a High Court injunction secured by its general secretary, Mr Charlie Lennon."
Mr Lennon's injunction - the subject of an ongoing High Court case - prevents Mr Cahill and another union officer from investigating alleged bogus expenses claims. The ASTI was taken to the Labour Court by its head office staff after a dispute over the non-payment of expenses.
The ASTI had said it was willing to pay the expenses at all times, provided they were submitted on Revenue-compliant forms. During the hearing, the court heard complaints from head office staff that they were working in an intolerable atmosphere where there was a culture of bullying and harassment.