Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91418 Case Number: LCR13443 Section / Act: S67 Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK - and - A WORKER |
Claim by a worker for the restoration of an alternate week-end overtime roster, and compensation for his removal from this roster.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court in the light of the circumstances of the case does not
recommend concession of the worker's claim.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Brennan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91418 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13443
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by a worker for the restoration of an alternate week-end
overtime roster, and compensation for his removal from this
roster.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned is employed in the biological services
unit of the College which houses animals used mostly for
experimental work. A week-end overtime roster is operated each
Saturday and Sunday to provide the necessary service to the
animals housed in this centre. The worker together with a
technician operated this roster on an alternate week-end basis.
The roster was extended to cover three workers as a result of an
increase in staffing levels. In February, 1990 Management
suspended the worker concerned from the roster on the grounds that
he was unreliable due to excessive sick leave. The worker claimed
that Management's decision was unfair. He sought restoration to
the roster and compensation for loss of earnings. The issue was
referred to the Conciliation Service of the Labour Court on the
26th February, 1990. Following a conciliation conference which
was held in May, 1990 the worker was restored to the roster on a
one in three week-end basis as from July, 1990. Management
rejected his claim for compensation. Subsequently the worker
submitted a claim for the restoration of the alternate week-end
working and compensation in the amount of £750 for the period from
February, 1990 to July, 1990. Management rejected the claim. A
further conciliation conference held on the 16th October, 1990
failed to resolve the issue. The dispute was referred to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation on the 18th
January, 1991. A Court hearing was held in Cork on the 25th
September, 1991.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Management changed the roster of the worker concerned
without consultation. Some years previously Management also
reduced his overtime hours - again without any consultation.
The worker rejects Management's claim that his sick absences
were excessive. They have not given specific dates and times
in relation to these absences. Over a thirty-year period the
worker concerned has had eleven absences five of which
totalled fourteen days. These would be covered by the
College's casual sick leave allowance which allows a worker 7
days per year. The worker has had two major absences of 12
and 17 days. These occurred as a result of severe influenza
epidemics. The worker never missed a week-end roster over a 9
year period.
2. The worker is considered by Management to be a risk in
terms of operating week-end rosters in the unit. On
successive holiday periods the worker held responsibility for
the whole area as other workers were on holidays. The College
is justifying the worker's removal from the roster on a health
issue yet it has a very poor record of safety in the workplace
(details supplied to the Court).
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Following the conciliation conference held in May, 1990
the worker concerned was reinstated to the week-end roster.
It was agreed then that the worker's claim for the restoration
of the one week-end in two roster would be withdrawn.
Subsequently the worker re-activated the claim for alternate
week-end working together with a claim for compensation.
Management rejected both claims.
2. The growth in staffing levels at the biological services
unit which gave rise to the 1 in 3 week-end roster was the
result of an expansion of the unit. In this respect
Management has an obligation to distribute work among all the
staff who had an entitlement to be scheduled on the roster.
In pursuing his claim for the 1 in 2 week-end roster the
worker concerned is in effect seeking preferential treatment.
Management cannot entertain a claim that would have the effect
of discriminating in favour of any worker.
3. The worker's claim for compensation is not valid. He was
able to avail of extensive overtime in the library during the
period in question and has suffered no identifiable loss of
earnings. He accepted that the reinstatement to the 1 in 3
roster in July, 1990 arose only on the basis of greater
reliability of attendance being assured in the future.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court in the light of the circumstances of the case does not
recommend concession of the worker's claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_________________________
15th October, 1991. Deputy Chairman
T.O'D./J.C.