Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9331 Case Number: LCR14003 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION (IPA) - and - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION |
A dispute concerning the payment of removal expenses.
Recommendation:
The Court finds that agreement was reached between the claimant
and the I.P.A. which included an amount of money in respect of
re-location expenses. The Court having considered all of the
aspects of the issue as raised by the parties in their oral and
written statements does not find grounds for any further payment.
Accordingly the Court rejects the claimant's claim.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9331 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14003
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION (IPA)
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION
SUBJECT:
1. A dispute concerning the payment of removal expenses.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. In September, 1986, the worker, who, at the time, was
working for Cork Corporation, applied for and was successful
in securing a two-year appointment with the IPA. On the 20th
April, 1988, he was offered and accepted a permanent
appointment with the Institute.
2. On the 19th June, 1990 the worker submitted a claim for
removal expenses which the Company rejected. The matter was
referred to the Labour Relations Commission on the 14th
January, 1991. Conciliation conferences took place on the
27th February, 1991, 2nd December, 1991 and 9th March, 1992.
Agreement could not be reached and the dispute was referred
by the Labour Relations Commission to the Labour Court on the
8th January, 1993. The Court investigated the matter on the
9th February, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Removal expenses have been paid in the past and have
been accepted as a legitimate expense.
2. The permanent post was taken up in the full expectation
that removal expenses would be paid.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The institute does not have a formal removal expenses
scheme.
2. In the few cases where arrangements have been agreed, it
has formed part of the negotiations on the overall
remuneration package decided on appointment.
3. Terms and conditions were agreed with the Institute in
1988 which included a once off payment of #700.
4. No payments have been made in recent cases and
concession of the claim could have repercussive effects.
5. The claim is cost-increasing and debarred under PESP.
Recommendation:
The Court finds that agreement was reached between the claimant
and the I.P.A. which included an amount of money in respect of
re-location expenses. The Court having considered all of the
aspects of the issue as raised by the parties in their oral and
written statements does not find grounds for any further payment.
Accordingly the Court rejects the claimant's claim.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
22nd March, 1993 Tom McGrath
P.O.C./M.H. ____________________________________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.