Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88464 Case Number: LCR11996 Section / Act: S67 Parties: DUBLIN PORT AND DOCKS BOARD - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Claim on behalf of 16 clerical and administrative staff for a re-location allowance.
Recommendation:
8. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties and also the Productivity Agreement of 1981, does not find
that the claimants are entitled to compensation in respect of
disturbance.
However because of the additional effort required of the
claimants, the stringent time scale and standards involved in this
particular operation, and the other circumstances which pertained
at the time, the Court recommends that the Board should pay them
the sum of £100 each in final settlement of their claim.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88464 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11996
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: DUBLIN PORT AND DOCKS BOARD
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of 16 clerical and administrative staff for a
re-location allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. The workers concerned are employed in the Warehousing
Department which up to 15th February, 1988, was located in the
Custom House Docks site. The Department was then transferred to
its present location at Port Centre, Alexandra Road.
3. When the move was first mooted all the Unions concerned
representing clerical and manual workers entered into negotiations
with Management on the proposed re-location. At the request of
Management the Union representing the clerical workers withdrew
from the negotiations.
4. The claim on behalf of the manual workers was referred to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. The Court
subsequently issued the following Recommendation (LCR No. 11236
refers) -
"The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties and also the Productivity Agreement negotiated in
1980, does not find it possible to recommend payment of
compensation in respect of disturbance.
The Court recognises that the relocation is a major exercise
which must be carried out quickly and effectively if
subsequent cost is not to be involved. Provided that the
total transfer, that is including the final move to the Port,
is achieved in the time scale and to the standard set by the
Management, the Court recommends that in addition to the
necessary overtime payments, the Company should set aside
£12,000 for distribution among the staff involved on a basis
to be agreed among the parties".
5. The Union claimed a pro rata amount of £3,048 to be paid to
the clerical workers involved in the re-location. The Board
rejected the claim and the matter was referred to the Conciliation
Service of the Labour Court on 24th February, 1988. A
Conciliation Conference was held on 18th April, 1988. As no
agreement was reached both parties subsequently agreed on 29th
May, 1988, to refer the matter to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was held on
28th July, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The Board has argued that it is precluded from conceding
the claim because of an 1981 Agreement between the Board and
the clerical workers (Clause 4.3 refers). It is the Union's
contention that a similar Agreement applies to the manual
workers and they have been paid the re-location allowance.
2. The clerical workers were involved in the same move as
the manual workers and the move was achieved within the
timetable and other criteria determined by Management.
Consequently the Union considers the claim for a re-location
allowance to be reasonable and accordingly asks the Court to
recommend concession of same.
3. As in the case of the manual workers, the clerical
workers also had to put in a greater effort to ensure that
the move was completed within the specified time limit.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. The 1981 Agreement provided for an increase in salary in
respect of the new offices at Alexandra Road. The workers at
the Custom House Docks as well as workers in other locations,
were recipients of the monetary benefits arising from this
Agreement. The Union at that time decided not to seek
disturbance money but instead sought compensation in the
context of a productivity agreement. This Agreement is still
in operation and it is the Board's contention that the
re-location to Alexandra Road has already been paid for in
accordance with the Agreement.
2. Transfers of clerical and administrative staff from one
department and location to another, including the Warehousing
Department, have long been a regular feature of the Board's
employment. Since the occupation of Port Centre in 1981 at
least five officers have been transferred to the Custom House
Docks site at Amiens Street from Port Centre, and at least
eight have been transferred to Port Centre from the Customs
House Docks. One Officer was transferred to the Custom House
Docks from Port Centre and after some years, was, transferred
back to Port Centre. This illustrates that movement of staff
between the Custom House Docks and Port Centre, in both
directions, was accepted by staff as a condition of their
employment.
RECOMMENDATION:
8. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties and also the Productivity Agreement of 1981, does not find
that the claimants are entitled to compensation in respect of
disturbance.
However because of the additional effort required of the
claimants, the stringent time scale and standards involved in this
particular operation, and the other circumstances which pertained
at the time, the Court recommends that the Board should pay them
the sum of £100 each in final settlement of their claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
16th August, 1988 Nicholas Fitzgerald
M.D./P.W. Deputy Chairman