Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89123 Case Number: LCR12362 Section / Act: S67 Parties: IRISH RAIL - and - TRANSPORT SALARIED STAFFS' ASSOCIATION |
Claim on behalf of a worker for payment of disturbance allowance and compensation for loss of earnings.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made the Court recommends
that the Company amends its offer to the worker concerned to a sum
of #1500 and that the offer so amended be accepted in full
settlement of all claims.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Heffernan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89123 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12362
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: IRISH RAIL
and
TRANSPORT SALARIED STAFFS' ASSOCIATION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of a worker for payment of disturbance
allowance and compensation for loss of earnings.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1987, an investigation was carried out by the O & M Section
of the Company into the administrative procedures at Heuston goods
depot. The worker concerned was employed as a senior clerical
officer at Heuston and following the examination it was decided to
transfer the major part of his duties to the control of the
station master, Heuston and incorporated in the duties of the
clerical workers there. The worker was transferred on 4th
January, 1988 to North Wall operations office to replace a senior
clerical officer who was retired on voluntary severance, he also
retained some of his previous duties. Following this the Union
claimed that a disturbance payment should be made to the worker in
line with the Clerical and Executive Grades Productivity Agreement
and that he should also be compensated for loss of earnings at two
and a half times the annual loss. The Company rejected the claim
for a disturbance allowance on the basis of a Government embargo
on such payments and offered to make a payment in respect of
compensation for loss of earnings. No agreement could be reached
and on 18th November, 1988 the matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference was held on 10th January, 1989 (earliest date suitable
to the parties) at which no progress was made and on 21st
February, 1989, the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. In February, 1989, the Company
made an offer of #1,000 in respect of compensation for loss of
earnings. The Court investigated the dispute on 7th April, 1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The reorganisation of the clerical workloads in the two
offices and the voluntary severance arrangements for a worker
arose from an O & M examination and report as provided for in
the Clerical and Executive Grades Productivity Agreement. The
purpose of the agreement is to provide greater efficiency and
reduce costs, and in such circumstances it provides for the
payment of disturbance allowance and compensation for loss of
earnings (details supplied to the Court). The worker
transferred prior to the 27th wage round. The release of the
worker in North Wall on voluntary severance and the
reorganisation including the transfer of this worker
represents a considerable saving to the Company.
2. Various groups of salaried workers who had transferred to
other locations following the closure of the Broadstone
Overhauls Workshops in 1987 had received the appropriate
disturbance payments. The Company acknowledged in Labour
Court Recommendation No. 11005, which dealt with a claim for
disturbance allowance for the civil engineering workers, that
the relevant Government department has accepted that formal
productivity schemes are exempted from the Department's
embargo on disturbance payments (details supplied to the
Court). This worker should be paid a disturbance allowance
and compensated for loss of earnings in line with the Clerical
and Executive Grades Productivity Agreement.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company is in a viability situation and has pointed
out to the trade unions on a number of occasions that staff
reductions must be achieved and costs contained if the Company
is to survive. Since January, 1984 there has been a
Government embargo on the making of disturbance payments to
staff in public sector employment including this Company. In
the case of the closure of Broadstone Workshops, a significant
number of workers were involved and special approval was given
as the then Minister for Communications accepted that special
circumstances existed which had been raised with the
department in 1984. The Labour Court itself has not
recommended payment of disturbance allowances in a number of
recent cases (Labour Court Recommendation Nos. 11005, 11385,
11410 refer). No disturbance payment should be made in this
case.
2. In order to finance the first year's increase under the
27th wage round it was necessary for the Company to secure the
agreement of the trade unions to co-operate in attaining
necessary reductions in staff numbers, greater flexibility,
etc (details supplied to the Court). The Productivity
Agreement is not of relevance here. In many cases the Court
has not recommended payment of compensation for loss of
earnings in circumstances where changes arose due to serious
financial constraints and loss of business, where compensation
has been recommended it has been in the region of six months
purchase of the loss (details supplied to the Court). The
overtime of this worker was not extensive and was not on a
regular rostered basis. The Company has recognised the fact
that his earnings have reduced since his transfer (#955 in
twelve months). The Company's offer of #1,000 is fair and
should be accepted.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made the Court recommends
that the Company amends its offer to the worker concerned to a sum
of #1500 and that the offer so amended be accepted in full
settlement of all claims.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
____________________
28th April, 1989. Deputy Chairman
U.M./J.C.