Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90287 Case Number: LCR13156 Section / Act: S67 Parties: H.G.W. PAINTS LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
SUBJECT: 1. Dispute concerning the transfer of a salesman from one area to another.
Recommendation:
6. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court,
accepting the Company's right to change the areas of salespersons,
does, recommend however that in view of the long and dedicated service
of the claimant, they sympathetically review returning him to his
former area during 1991.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90287 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13156
THE LABOUR COURT
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: H.G.W. PAINTS LIMITED
(Represented by the Federation of Irish Employers)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the transfer of a salesman from one area to
another.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker here concerned has 35 years' service with the Company,
12 years in the factory and the remainder as a sales person. In
January, 1990 the Company transferred the worker concerned from his
former sales area West Cork, Kerry, Limerick and Clare to a new area
East Cork, Waterford, Tipperary, Carlow and Kilkenny. The worker
agreed to the transfer under protest. The Union objected to the
transfer on the grounds that the worker was a senior sales
representative and would suffer domestic upset because of the transfer.
In addition over the years he had built up a successful trade and
relationship with his customers in his old region. The Company
responded that the worker's experience was needed in the new region
which was in disarray. The Union then proposed that the worker be
transferred temporarily to the new region for a period of 18 months.
3. This proposal was rejected by the Company and the matter was
referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court on 14 March,
1990. A conciliation conference was held on 17th May, 1990. As no
agreement was reached the parties subsequently consented to a referral
to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court
hearing was held in Cork on 5th December, 1990 a date suitable to the
parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker's transfer takes him away from his family for 7 to
8 nights in four weeks compared with two nights in six weeks prior
to this. He is away from home more nights than any other
representative. It also means he has about 200 miles additional
driving per week to do. His business area takes him within 50
miles of Dublin.
2. It is the norm for companies to bring their older more senior
representatives nearer the home base not further away as on this
occasion. The move doesn't make good business sense, it has
resulted in major trauma to the worker with a feedback from his
old customers that they are very disappointed at his enforced
move.
3. The worker feels that the Company are treating him most
unfairly over the past year in this, and other matters such as
being forced to negotiate for a 1.6 litre car when every other
senior representative and not so senior representative have it by
right.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The worker is a sales representative with the Company and has
covered various regions from time to time. For a variety of
reasons sales representatives areas of operation are changed. In
early 1990 the sales representative for the South East region
resigned and that area was in a state of disarray as far as sales
were concerned. Together with other changes in sales staff it was
decided to transfer the worker here concerned to the South Eastern
area as he was a very experienced salesman and was the obvious
choice to clean up the mess and improve sales.
2. The worker recognised the position in the South East and that
he was the best person to achieve that objective. As far as the
Company was aware the only outstanding issue was the upgrading of
his car from 1.4 to 1.6 litre. Following discussions at local
level this matter was resolved.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court,
accepting the Company's right to change the areas of salespersons,
does, recommend however that in view of the long and dedicated service
of the claimant, they sympathetically review returning him to his
former area during 1991.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
18 January, 1991 Evelyn Owens
M.D. / M.O'C. _______________
Deputy Chairman