Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90666 Case Number: LCR13101 Section / Act: S67 Parties: RORER IRELAND LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim by the Union concerning the interpretation of the Plant Agreement.
Recommendation:
5. Having fully considered the submissions and arguments of the
parties and aware of the apparent contradictory clauses in the
agreement, the Court is of the view that the dominant section is
Section 6. The Court interprets this section as permiting the
Company to take disciplinary action against an employee for
serious misconduct prior to the implementation of the grievance
procedure by the Union.
The Court so determines.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90666 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13101
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: RORER IRELAND LIMITED
(Represented by the Federations of Irish Employers)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union concerning the interpretation of the Plant
Agreement.
BACKGROUND:
2. On 5th November, 1990, an incident occured between a female
supervisor and one of her male staff. The Company regarded this
as "serious misconduct" and suspended the worker for two days.
The Union objected to this on the basis that it was in breach of
the Plant Agreement, the relevant clauses of which are attached at
Appendix 1. The suspension was delayed for 24 hours to allow a
possible settlement but then implemented by the Company. An
unofficial strike commenced. The strike lasted five days before
it was resolved. The Company maintains that it complied fully
with the Plant Agreement. On 15th November, 1990, the matter of
the interpretation of the Plant Agreement was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. No agreement was
reached at a conciliation conference held on 16th November, 1990,
and the issue was referred to the Labour Court on 18th November,
1990, for investigation and recommendation. The Court
investigated the dispute on 20th November, 1990, in Nenagh.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union believes that the Right of Objection Clause
bestows on the Union the authority to operate the grievance
procedure up to and including Stage 4. If the English
language is to have any meaning the Right of Objection Clause
must be read as encompassing the complete grievance procedure
and not stopping at Stage 3. All four stages are operative.
2. Any pleadings that the Union's interpretation bestows an
advantage on the Union are irrelevant. It was a freely
entered into agreement that has operated for ten years. There
is ample provision for either side to initiate the process of
change or to terminate the Plant Agreement. Indeed,
negotiations on these matters have been on-going for several
months.
3. 3. The Court may feel that the Company is unduly tied by
the Union's interpretation, however, it is what is written
that is at issue and not what, in retrospect, anyone would
consider desirable that should be considered. The Union would
also point out that in a recent incident where a worker was
suspended, the Union felt that the suspension was justified
and did not proceed through the grievance procedures. This
fact should allay any fears that the Company or Court may have
about the Union not acting responsibly.
4. The Company appear to rely on Clause 6 of the Agreement,
which concerns Termination of Employment, in support of their
case. The Union would point out that this Clause also states
that "the Union may appeal against the Company's decision, an
appeal being dealt with by the use of the Grievance and
Dispute Procedure".
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company fully accepts the Union's right to grieve
any of its decisions and further respects the necessity to
process grievances relating to suspension within 24 hours as
per the Rights of Objection Clause.
2. In response to an act of serious misconduct the Company
is entitled to exercise its discretion in determining and
exercising a suspension. Such action is specifically provided
for by Clause 6 of the Plant Agreement. Determination and
implementation of disciplinary action is a managerial
responsibility.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having fully considered the submissions and arguments of the
parties and aware of the apparent contradictory clauses in the
agreement, the Court is of the view that the dominant section is
Section 6. The Court interprets this section as permiting the
Company to take disciplinary action against an employee for
serious misconduct prior to the implementation of the grievance
procedure by the Union.
The Court so determines.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
4th December, 1990 ---------------
B O'N/U.S. Chairman
APPENDIX 1
EXTRACT FROM PLANT AGREEMENT:
6. TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT:
The Management may suspend workers with or without notice of
payment in the event of serious misconduct pending
discussions taking place between both parties. In the event
of the Company suspending any worker the Union shall be
notified immediately. The Union may appeal against the
Comany's decision, an appeal being dealt with by the use of
the Grievance and Dispute Procedure as set out in Clause
13.B. In the event of a successful appeal by the Union,
wages lost during the period of suspension or dismissal will
be reimbursed by the Company, provided the Grievance
Procedure has been followed and no prior stoppage of work or
any other form of industrial action, or strike takes place.
Not withstanding this, notice or payment in lieu thereof
will be in accordance with the Minimum Notice and Terms of
Employment Act, 1973.
13. DISPUTES:
(a) Interpretation of the Agreement:
In the event of a dispute concerning the interpretation
of this agreement, the dispute shall be referred to a
mutually agreed Arbitrator, whose decision shall be
binding for the lifetime of this agreement. In the
event of failure to agree on an Arbitrator acceptable to
both sides, the Labour Court shall be asked to give its
interpretation and such interpretation shall be binding
to both sides for the lifetime of this Agreement.
(b) The objective of this procedure, is to provide a
framework in which grievances or problems of any kind
can be settled at the level nearest the point of origin
and the shortest possible time.
Any any time an employee has the right to discuss a
grievance in confidenance with an appropriate member of
management.
STAGE ONE
Any request or complaint which may arise shall, in the
first place, be referred by the employee and/or his Shop
Steward concerned to his Supervisor and a real effort
must be made to settle the matter. The Supervisor will
give his response within 24 hours.
STAGE TWO
Failing a satisfactory settlement the matter in dispute
shall be referred by the Shop Steward/or the employee
concerned in writing to the department Manager within
two days of the Supervisors response. The Departmental
Manager will hear the objection fully and give his
answer within 5 days.
STAGE THREE
Failing satisfactory settlement at this stage the matter
shall be referred to a meeting between Management and
Trade Union representatives. Both parties agree that
the matter shall be resolved as quickly and as
expediently as possible.
STAGE FOUR:
If the problem cannot be solved at this level the
parties will request the Labour Court to arrange a
conciliation conference or other investigation or refer
the matter to a Rights Commissioner. During all stages
of this procedure the status quo shall continue to
operate.
Under no cirucmstancs whatsoever shall a strike,
stoppage of work or any other form of industrial action
or lock-out take place unless the above conciliation
procedure has been complied with.
On this procedure being exhausted without agreement, the
Trade Union shall following a full Labour Court
Recommendation desist from taking any industrial action
until fourteen (14) days clear notice of intent has been
given to the Company.
Employees involved in security work and fire and safety
work shall continue to discharge their normal fire
fighting and security duties in the event of any strike
taking place.
DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE:
(c) In order to ensure fair treatment of employees who
become liable to discipliary actions through breach of
conduct, non compliance with factory regulations and
procedures, or an inadequate job performance, the
following procedure is laid down:-
1. The normal action in the first instance of
liability to disciplinary action will be an
informal warning from the Supervisor, who will
suggest appropriate corrective action to to the
employee concerned. The employees Shop Steward may
be rpesent if the employee so wishes.
2. A repretition of similar cause for the
dissatisfaction will justify a formal warning from
Management who will record in writing to the
employee the following:-
(a) Areas of dissatisfaction.
(b) Period of probation allowed for the improvement to
be demonstrated and the action to which the
employee will be liable for subsequent failure to
reach standards.
A Trade Union representative, will, if the employee
so wishes, be present when a formal warning is
given and the Company will advise the employee of
his right in this respect.
3. If on completion of stages one and two, an employee
still fails to reach the prescribed standards after
the period allowed the action already advised by
Management will be acted upon, this action may
include suspension without pay or dismissal.
RIGHT OF OBJECTON.
An objection of an employee against disciplinary action
shall follow the normal grievance procedure except in
all cases of suspension or dismissal the objection shall
be heard within twenty-four (24) hours. Unless the
objection is lodged within five (5) days it will be
assumed that the employee accepts the decision.