Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87901 Case Number: LCR11622 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: IRISH RAIL - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION;DUBLIN NO. 11 BRANCH |
Claim by the Union against the disciplinary action taken against a worker - downgrading and transfer.
Recommendation:
6. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court in view of the nature of the worker's illness and in light
of his length of service recommends that he be allowed to continue
on his former grade until his retirement.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87901 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11622
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: IRISH RAIL
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
(DUBLIN NO. 11 BRANCH)
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union against the disciplinary action taken
against a worker - downgrading and transfer.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker commenced employment with the Company in 1940 as a
depotperson, he was subsequently appointed as a signalman at
Sydney Parade and in 1978 was promoted to senior depotperson at
Booterstown. The worker's attendance record disimproved (due to
illness) after his appointment as senior depotperson. On 19th
February, 1986 the worker was charged with excessive absenteeism
and following a hearing he was informed in writing on 5th March,
1986 that he was being given a final warning that continuance of
the level of absenteeism would result in reduction in grade and
transfer from Booterstown. Following this hearing the worker had
further periods of sick leave and was again charged with a
continued high level of absenteeism on 6th October, 1986 and
following a hearing the worker was issued with a notice of
dismissal by the District Manager on 6th May, 1987. The worker
appealed this decision through the Union. The appeal was heard on
14th July, 1987 by the District Manager's Superior Officer, the
Regional Manager Operations and the notice of dismissal was
rescinded and the following penalty was imposed:
- one week's suspension,
- reduction in grade to depotperson and transfer to Pearse
Station.
- Warning of dismissal if absenteeism continued.
3. Following this the Union referred the matter to the Rights
Commissioners' service, however the Company refused to attend as
it was of the opinion that the disciplinary procedure in the
Company dealt adequately and fairly with such cases. On 17th
November, 1987 the Union referred the matter to the Labour Court
under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 for
investigation and recommendation. The Union agreed to be bound by
the Court's recommendation. The Court investigated the dispute on
17th December, 1987.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker spent almost 37 years as a signalman during
which period there were no problems regarding his attendance
record. At that time he realised that night work was
aggravating his bronchial condition and therefore sought a
transfer to the post of foreman (senior depotperson). In the
first few years of this appointment his condition did not
worsen and it was not until the early nineteen eighties that
the Company became concerned with his attendance record. In
the circumstances the worker therefore decided to seek in
1984 voluntary severance, however the amount of money offered
was not sufficient to cover the worker's circumstances,
therefore he did not take it.
2. The current rate of pay (pre 1987 wage agreement) for a
senior depotperson is #147.13 for a 40 hour week compared to
#135.89 for a depotperson. In addition, while the worker was
in Booterstown he was guaranteed 7 day working, whereas at
Pearse Street this is not the case and the difference amounts
to approximately #70 per week (details supplied to the
Court). In addition the senior depotperson's rate of pay has
since been increased by a further #4 per 40 hour week.
3. The Company's decision has affected this worker's social,
working and family life and affected him financially. In
respect of his working life he has had to change from a
position where as a senior depotperson he was to all intents
and purposes the Station Master and was respected by other
workers. In his present position some of the junior workers
have been assigned to relieve the worker's successor at
Booterstown.
4. The worker is due to retire in November, 1988, but this
does not seem to have been taken into account by the Company.
The Company were asked by the Union to take into account the
worker's age, service and dedication to the Company during
his 45 years' of service to the Company and to let him retire
with dignity. The following options were put forward:
- retirement on grounds of ill health,
- application of voluntary severance terms in the Company,
- leave the worker with his grade and conditions (i.e. on a
personal basis).
Any of the above would have been feasible options for the
Company to take, however they would not consider any. It
is the Union's view that taking into account the full
situation of this case the decision of the Company was
not tempered with the mercy that someone with this
worker's service would have expected.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The worker's attendance record has been bad for a number
of years (details supplied to the Court). While medical
certificates were submitted, these absences were too
extensive and frequent for such a position as senior
depotperson. The position of senior depotperson held by the
worker is a responsible one requiring good attendance to
ensure a proper service to the public. It was not possible
to implement any of the Union's options.
2. The Company dealt with this situation very leniently
having taken the worker's long service into account and would
in fact have been justified in dismissing him. The Company
does not dispute the fact that the worker has an ongoing
illness problem, however the fact is that the worker failed
to discharge his obligations (under his contract of service)
to the Company. The Employment Appeals Tribunal has upheld
dismissal decisions in similar cases (details supplied to the
Court).
3. The Company has continuously over the years made every
effort to tackle the problems of absenteeism. If the
decision by the Company in this instance is altered there
would be widespread and repercussive effects on staff morale
and absenteeism. Consequently, this would affect the
Company's efforts to maintain and improve public support for
its services to ensure the future viability of the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court in view of the nature of the worker's illness and in light
of his length of service recommends that he be allowed to continue
on his former grade until his retirement.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.
John O'Connell
___11th___January,___1988. ___________________
U. M. / M. F. Deputy Chairman