Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87675 Case Number: AD8787 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: CENTRAL BANK OF IRELAND - and - ASTMS |
Appeal, by the Union, against a Rights Commissioner's Recommendation concerning three extra days annual leave.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court takes the view that the workers right to additional annual
leave derived directly from her position as a currency checker.
Her promotion maintained the level of leave available inclusive of
the 3 day awarded by the arbitrator.
The Court is of the opinion that the 3 additional days were
subsumed by the leave entitlement attaching to her promotion and
insofar as the condition was not worsened therefore is of the
opinion that the Rights Commissioners Recommendation should stand.
The Court so decides.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87675 THE LABOUR COURT AD8787
SECTION 13(9)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
APPEAL DECISION NO. 87 OF 1987
Parties: CENTRAL BANK OF IRELAND
and
ASSOCIATION OF SCIENTIFIC TECHNICAL MANAGERIAL STAFFS
Subject:
1. Appeal, by the Union, against a Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation concerning three extra days annual leave.
Background:
2. This appeal concerns one worker employed by the Bank as a
supervisor currency checker. The worker was promoted to this
position on 24th September, 1986. This promotion would normally
attract three extra days annual leave. However, in April, 1986 an
arbitration finding had been issued which granted three days extra
leave on a personal basis to fourteen currency checkers, the
worker who was then a currency checker was one of those to get the
extra three days. Normally currency checkers with 5 years'
service have 19 days annual leave entitlement. This group of
fourteen workers have 22 days leave. The normal annual leave
entitlement of currency supervisors after five years service is 22
days. The Union claimed that the worker should retain those three
extra days and get the three extra days leave arising from her
promotion.
The Bank stated that the worker now has the same annual leave as
other currency supervisors i.e. 22 days, and rejected the claim
for extra leave. No agreement was reached through local
negotiations and the matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner
who issued his recommendation on 30th July, 1987 as follows:
"..... I have come to the conclusion that there is right
on the worker's side in seeking to retain the benefit
of her three extra days holidays. There is also
justification in the fears expressed by the bank with
regard to likely repercussions. It seems to me
therefore that the best formula for dealing with the
rights of the worker on one side and the justifiable
fears of the bank on the other is for the matter to be
dealt with on the basis of a buy-out. Therefore I
recommend as follows; the worker should be paid an
ex-gratia sum of #350 and this to be accepted by her in
full and final settlement of her claim for the
retention of her 3 extra days holidays along with the
three extra days holidays accompanying the position of
currency supervisor. Having accepted the sum of #350
in gratia, the worker's annual entitlement to holidays
will be no greater nor no less than the entitlement of
the other currency supervisors with similar service to
the worker".
(The worker was named in the Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation).
On 3rd September, 1987 the Union, appealed against that
recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section
13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Court heard the
appeal on 12th October, 1987, earlier dates were unsuitable to one
or other of the parties.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) The worker should not lose her promotional annual leave
because of the arbitrators award and she should receive
25 days annual leave.
(ii) Any of the fourteen currency checkers, who were
concerned in the arbitrators finding in April, 1986 who
have been promoted or who may be promoted during their
term of employment within the Bank should not lose
their annual leave because of the arbitrators award.
This should be clearly specified by the Court.
Bank's arguments:
4. (a) The worker's duties and responsibilities, terms and
conditions of employment were changed when she was
promoted to supervisor currency checker. Since the
worker already had the appropriate annual leave
entitlement for currency supervisors, no additional
leave was granted to her on promotion.
(b) It is accepted that, as a result of the arbitration
finding, the worker's annual leave entitlement as a
currency checker was enhanced. However, the Bank could
not accept the anomalous situation of the worker having
the same leave entitlements as the highest promotion
grade in the area i.e. senior supervisor.
(c) The worker's claim is not justified by the arbitration
finding and it would have illogical and repercussive
effects on the leave structure of the grades in the
area. It would also establish a precedent for others
of the fourteen currency checkers who might be promoted
at any stage.
DECISION:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court takes the view that the workers right to additional annual
leave derived directly from her position as a currency checker.
Her promotion maintained the level of leave available inclusive of
the 3 day awarded by the arbitrator.
The Court is of the opinion that the 3 additional days were
subsumed by the leave entitlement attaching to her promotion and
insofar as the condition was not worsened therefore is of the
opinion that the Rights Commissioners Recommendation should stand.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
__________________________
Deputy Chairman
3rd November, 1987.
T.O'M/J.C.