Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90602 Case Number: LCR13135 Section / Act: S67 Parties: DUBLIN CORPORATION - and - IRISH MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' TRADE UNION;SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the annual leave entitlement of firefighters.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made and having
regard to the fact that the Corporation already concedes the
allowance to other employees who are absent arising from work
related injuries, recommends that the Unions' claim be conceded.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90602 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13135
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: DUBLIN CORPORATION
and
IRISH MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' TRADE UNION
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the annual leave entitlement of
firefighters.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Unions' claim is for the reckoning of absences as a result
of occupational injury in determining entitlement to annual leave.
The Holidays (Employees) Act, 1973 provides that:-
"Annual leave shall be equivalent to three working weeks where
the employee works for the employer at least 1,400 hours
during the leave year."
The Corporation deducts annual leave from firefighters who work
less than 1,400 hours in the leave year as a result of sick leave
arising from injury at work. The Union claims that it is unfair
to penalise firefighters in this way because of the dangerous
nature of their work. Management states that the Corporation is
only applying the terms of the Act. The issue could not be
resolved in local level discussions and was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court on the 27th March, 1990.
A conciliation conference was held on the 2nd October, 1990 but no
agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour
Court on the 16th October, 1990. A Court hearing was held on the
6th December, 1990.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Unions are not disputing what is stated in the Act but
are contesting the rigid adherence to it by the Corporation.
Management cannot claim that they are obliged to adhere
strictly to the terms of the Act because they do not apply the
same rule to all staff.
2. Rent collectors employed by the Corporation, who are on
sick leave arising from occurrences at work, do not lose
annual leave. The most common reason for a rent collector
being on work related sick leave is following a robbery at a
rent office. The Corporation stipulates assault on rent
collectors as the only exception they make to the
non-assessment of work related sick leave in deciding
entitlement to annual leave. However "assault" is treated
quite liberally. If a rent collector is absent from work,
following a robbery in his/her office, this absence is
discounted when deciding the person's annual leave
entitlement. This is a fair and honourable way to treat
staff.
3. The Unions cannot understand the logic of treating rent
collectors in a sensible and sympathetic manner, but treating
firefighters less favourably. The Unions are not suggesting
that rent collecting is not a hazardous job, but there are
dangers inherent in firefighting also and firefighters are
involved in accidents which result in them being absent from
work.
4. There is an agreement between the Corporation and the
Unions that a firefighter on "accident sick leave" does not
lose his unsocial hours allowance, so the Corporation has
accepted the principle that the individual so placed should
not be disadvantaged. However by losing a portion of annual
leave, a person suffers and he is discriminated against by
being treated less favourably than other Corporation staff
namely rent collectors.
CORPORATION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The principle behind the granting of annual leave is that
employees should have a break from work in order to be able to
rest and relax. It is evident, therefore, that the amount of
annual leave should be related to the actual time an employee
has worked. Section 3 of the Holidays (Employees) Act, 1973
reinforces this principle.
2. Concession of this claim would have the effect that an
employee who was absent continuously for twelve or more months
on sick leave would be granted annual leave although he has
not worked at all during the particular leave year.
3. Concession of the claim would have repercussive effects
throughout the Corporation and throughout the public service.
4. The rate of pay of firefighters takes full account of the
hazards which are an integral part of their employment.
5. Firefighters are treated most reasonably by the
Corporation at present in that when absent as a result of
occupational injuries they are paid full pay including all
allowances for working unsocial hours in respect of such
periods up to six months subject to them recouping to the
Corporation the amount of occupational injury benefit which
they are entitled to receive from the Department of Social
Welfare. Furthermore if a firefighter is continuously absent
for a period in excess of six months five sixths of full pay
including all allowances is paid for the period in excess of
six months.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made and having
regard to the fact that the Corporation already concedes the
allowance to other employees who are absent arising from work
related injuries, recommends that the Unions' claim be conceded.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
__________________________
7th January, 1991. Deputy Chairman
T.O'D./J.C.