Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90465 Case Number: LCR13050 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: DUBLIN COUNTY COUNCIL - and - LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICES UNION |
Claim on behalf of a worker for the restoration of a car-parking facility.
Recommendation:
7. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
finds no basis on which it could recommend concession of the
Union's claim.
The Court accordingly rejects the claim.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90465 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13050
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20
PARTIES: DUBLIN COUNTY COUNCIL
AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICES UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of a worker for the restoration of a
car-parking facility.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned, has been employed as a storeman by the
County Council since 1975. He contends that the then County
Accountant granted him the use of the car park in 11, Parnell
Square, a facility he enjoyed until earlier this year. The Union
is claiming the restoration of that facility.
3. The Council rejected the claim on the basis that limited
parking facilities were granted to certain categories of staff and
that the worker here concerned did not come within any of these
categories. It also claims that the provision of car-parking
facilities was not one of the worker's conditions of employment.
4. The County Council declined an invitation to attend either a
Rights Commissioner's hearing or a conciliation conference. The
Union then referred the claim to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation under Section 20(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Court hearing was held on 8th
October, 1990. The worker agreed to be bound by the Court's
recommendation.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The worker's duties involve maintaining adequate stock of
receipt books, order books and other stocks to ensure the
smooth running of other departments and therefore, it is often
necessary for him to deliver and collect supplies of printed
matter at short notice and access to car parking is
imperative.
5. 2. The worker has to attend hospital as an out-patient on a
regular basis so it is both in his and the Councils interest
to have easy accessibility to his car so as to ensure minimum
disruption to his work.
3. The Court is requested to recommend that the worker be
given back the car parking facility which he had for fifteen
years, which was awarded to him for specific reasons which
have now been established by custom and practice.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The provision of carparking facilities for staff was never
and is not part of the conditions of employment of any member
of staff.
2. The worker's assertion that he has been provided with
carparking facilities for fifteen years is incorrect. The
carparking spaces available in the rear of No. 11, Parnell
Square were reserved for certain named officials who had their
car registration numbers affixed to the walls at each
carparking space. The worker here concerned was not allocated
a space nor was he permitted to use the carpark.
3. The Council reject the claim that there is any duty on it
to provide carparking facilities for the worker who is not
required to use his car in connection with his employment in
the County Council. The worker is merely one of a number of
staff at various levels in the organisation whom the Council
is unable and is under no obligation to provide with a
carparking space and must, therefore, make his own
arrangements for attending work by whatever means of transport
he chooses.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
finds no basis on which it could recommend concession of the
Union's claim.
The Court accordingly rejects the claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court,
Evelyn Owens
__15th__October,___1990. ___________________
M. D. / M. F. Deputy Chairman