Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88197 Case Number: LCR11786 Section / Act: S67 Parties: OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION;UNION OF CONSTRUCTION ALLIED TRADES AND TECHNICIANS |
Claim on behalf of 12 workers for payment of a re-location allowance of £1,500 as a result of the transfer of the National Monuments depot from Kanturk to Mallow, a distance of approximately 13 miles.
Recommendation:
8. The Court accepts that the transfer to Mallow will result in
some inconvenience and additional expense for some of the workers
involved in this claim. On the other hand, there is insufficient
work in the immediate vicinity of Kanturk to justify the retention
of a depot there. Furthermore the prevailing financial
constraints are such that the O.P.W. is required to rationalise
its operations to the maximum extent possible.
Having taken account of all aspects of the case, the Court does
not find it possible to recommend concession of the claim. The
Court further recommends however that management keep the position
under review and avail of any opportunities arising to minimise
the inconvenience caused to the claimants.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Collins Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88197 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11786
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
UNION OF CONSTRUCTION ALLIED TRADES AND TECHNICIANS
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of 12 workers for payment of a re-location
allowance of £1,500 as a result of the transfer of the National
Monuments depot from Kanturk to Mallow, a distance of
approximately 13 miles.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union, following notification from the Office of Public
Works (O.P.W.) of its intention to re-locate the National
Monuments depot at Mallow, lodged a claim for a re-location
allowance of £1500 nett on behalf of the workers concerned in
January, 1986.
3. The O.P.W. rejected the claim and instead offered voluntary
redundancy terms to those workers who did not wish to transfer.
Another solution was also considered whereby the workers would
report directly to the site at normal starting times and be paid a
travelling allowance. None of the workers were interested in
redundancy and it was considered that the other option would
create more problems than it purported to resolve.
4. In the meantime contractual difficulties delayed the move to
Mallow (initially it was intended that the move take place in the
Summer of 1986) and the premises was not ready for occupation
until September, 1987. The O.P.W. offered the improved terms of
Voluntary Redundancy/Early Retirement announced by the Government
in July, 1987, but the workers concerned expressed little
interest.
5. The matter was referred to the Conciliation Service of the
Labour Court on 7th July, 1987. A Conciliation Conference was
held on 3rd September, 1987, as earlier dates were unsuitable to
the parties. No agreement was possible and in March, 1988, both
parties agreed to a referral to the Labour Court for investigation
and recommendation. A Court hearing was held on 23rd March, 1987.
6. The workers concerned transferred to the new base at Mallow on
22nd February, 1988, "under protest".
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. The distance from the old base in Kanturk to the new
headquarters in Mallow is approximately 13 miles and of the
12 employees involved in the claim only one employee is
travelling a shorter distance to work. Two men are
travelling roughly the same distance as previously and 9 are
travelling longer distances (details supplied to the Court).
2. In addition to the cost of the travelling involved, the
change has also meant serious inconveniences to the workers
who, when based in Kanturk, were able to transport their
children to schools or to work in that area. Alternative
arrangements must now be made and these also involve
additional cost.
3. The change of base will result in increased efficiency
for the O.P.W. and will also reduce costs significantly.
Mallow is also much more centrally located than Kanturk which
is at one extreme of the area of operations. During the past
year a company also re-located their base from the Kanturk
area to Mallow and the employees involved were paid a lump
sum settlement of £2,000 net per man as compensation for the
change.
4. The facts outlined clearly demonstrate that the workers
have a very genuine claim and have adhered to all the proper
procedures in trying to have this matter resolved.
5. The Unions are conscious of the constraints imposed on
the O.P.W. and have previously suggested that they should
consider alleviating the workers difficulties by continuing
to transport them from Kanturk at 8.00 a.m. each morning into
Mallow until such time as they are allowed to pay suitable
monetary compensation.
OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS ARGUMENTS:
8. 1. There are no significant financial savings to be made by
the O.P.W. in moving to Mallow. Any savings would be of an
intangible nature. The National Monuments Branch is not
comparable in this sense to a commercial manufacturing or
assembly line production operation.
2. The severe constraints of Public Service and O.P.W.
finances are well known to the Court. Any payment which
might be made would have to come from within the existing
funds allocated for wages which is just about adequate to
maintain present employment levels.
3. In 1983, the Minister for the Public Service directed
that all disturbance/re-location payments were to cease for
public sector employees with effect from the 1st January,
1984, because of the severe financial and budgetary problems
facing the Country. The public service finances have
deteriorated even further since the Minister issued that
directive.
4. From the O.P.W.'s viewpoint it is very difficult to
justify a cost increasing claim of this nature, against the
background of the past and current level of redundancies
being effected in its various services. In this decade alone
the Office has shed some 1,000 industrial posts.
5. The position of the O.P.W. is no different to that of
private sector companies experiencing severe trading
difficulties and account has been taken of such circumstances
in issuing previous Labour Court Recommendations. The
concept of disturbance/re-location payments is outdated and
without merit in the current economic climate, particularly
where improved and sought after facilities are being
provided.
RECOMMENDATION:
8. The Court accepts that the transfer to Mallow will result in
some inconvenience and additional expense for some of the workers
involved in this claim. On the other hand, there is insufficient
work in the immediate vicinity of Kanturk to justify the retention
of a depot there. Furthermore the prevailing financial
constraints are such that the O.P.W. is required to rationalise
its operations to the maximum extent possible.
Having taken account of all aspects of the case, the Court does
not find it possible to recommend concession of the claim. The
Court further recommends however that management keep the position
under review and avail of any opportunities arising to minimise
the inconvenience caused to the claimants.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
12th April, 1988 Nicholas Fitzgerald
M.D./P.W. Deputy Chairman