Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87431 Case Number: LCR11320 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: SECURICOR (I) LTD - and - MALACHY MCBRIDE |
Claim for compensation for illness arising from working conditions.
Recommendation:
5. The Court recommends that the Company make an ex-gratia
payment of #250.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Shiel Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87431 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11320
SECTION 20(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1969
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11320
PARTIES: SECURICOR (IRELAND) LIMITED
AND
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for compensation for illness arising from working
conditions.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is involved in the provision of a security guard
service, among other services, to clients' premises on a
contractual basis. The worker concerned joined the Company as a
security guard on the 18th June, 1979, and was assigned to a large
factory premises on Dublin's northside. During a protracted
industrial dispute at the plant, the worker alleges he suffered
harassment from the staff and that on occasions attempts were made
to cause him personal injury (details supplied to the Court). In
September, 1983, he was moved to a new location but again claims
he suffered harassment due to vandalism. These events left him
very nervous and shaken and in March, 1984, he suffered a nervous
breakdown. He was attended by a doctor who certified him as unfit
for work due to nervous debility. From then until February, 1987,
he sent monthly medical certificates to the Company. He reached
retirement age (65 years) in February, 1987, and was written to by
the Company, thanking him for his eight years' service and
enclosing a cheque for #216 in accordance with the provisions of
the Company's pension scheme. The worker sought compensation for
his illness and referred his case to a Rights Commissioner for
recommendation. As the Company was unwilling to attend a Rights
Commissioner's hearing, the worker referred the case to the Labour
Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969,
agreeing to be bound by the Court's recommendation. A Court
hearing was held on 7th July, 1987.
Worker's arguments:
3. (a) The worker concerned was conscientious and efficient in
carrying out his duties. He did twelve and sixteen
hour shifts and on occasions when there was no relief
available he often did 24 hour shifts. In addition, he
took no days off and worked his holidays as the Manager
of the client company preferred him there.
(b) The worker contends that his present illness is as a
direct result of the harassment and intimidation
suffered in carrying out his job.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) In relation to the claim before the Court for
compensation for illness arising out of working
conditions, the Company accepts no liability for the
worker's illness.
(b) It is the Company's contention that it treated the
worker fairly and reasonably by keeping his job open
for him in anticipation of him being fit to return to
work.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court recommends that the Company make an ex-gratia
payment of #250.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.
Evelyn Owens
___16th___July,___1987. ___________________
D. H. / M. F. Deputy Chairman