Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89237 Case Number: LCR12393 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: DUNNES STORES LIMITED (CORNELSCOURT) - and - IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION |
Dispute over the Company's alleged refusal to allow a shop steward carry out Union duties.
Recommendation:
5. The Court notes that the Company did not respond to an
invitation to attend the hearing.
The Court recommends that the Company allow the shop steward
reasonable time and facilities in which to carry out his functions
as a shop steward.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Shiel Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89237 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12393
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: DUNNES STORES LIMITED (CORNELSCOURT)
and
IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute over the Company's alleged refusal to allow a shop
steward carry out Union duties.
BACKGROUND:
2. There are approximately 90 members of the Union, employed in
various departments of the store. The Union claims that over the
past number of months the Company has imposed a number of
restrictions on its shop steward which prevents him from carrying
out his Union duties effectively. The shop steward is employed in
the drapery stockroom. The store trades from 9.00 a.m. to 6.00
p.m. on Monday, Tuesday and Saturday, and from 9.00 a.m. to 9.00
p.m. on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.
3. The Union had meetings with the Company in an attempt to
resolve the matter. As no agreement could be reached the matter
was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1969. The Union agreed to be bound by the Court's
recommendation. The Company did not attend or was not represented
at the hearing. The Court hearing was held on 28th Friday, 1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The nature of the restrictions imposed on the shop steward
are as follows:
(a) He is no longer allowed receive telephone calls from
the Union head office.
(b) He can only telephone the Union on his lunch hour (1.00
- 2.00) or after work (5.30 p.m.) and he must use the
public pay phone in the store if he does want to
contact the Union.
(c) He is not allowed leave his work area to speak to
members during working hours. This effectively means
that he cannot communicate with part-time members of
staff. He has received a warning for speaking to staff
during working hours without permission. Permission to
speak to staff is no longer given.
(d) He is not allowed distribute Union communications till
the store has closed.
(e) He is not allowed use the notice board.
(f) He has recently received a warning for being absent
from his place of work during working hours.
2. The Union is asking the Court to recommend that the shop
steward be allowed to receive and make telephone calls to and
from Union head office; that he be allowed consult with Union
members during working hours and that he be allowed to use the
notice board and distribute Union communications. In making
this request the Union is seeking no more than what is the
norm in good employments.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court notes that the Company did not respond to an
invitation to attend the hearing.
The Court recommends that the Company allow the shop steward
reasonable time and facilities in which to carry out his functions
as a shop steward.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
_________________________
15th May, 1989. Deputy Chairman
M.D./J.C.