Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93486 Case Number: AD9379 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: BUS EIREANN - and - A WORKER |
Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. C.W. 170/93.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
is of the view that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
not unreasonable in the circumstances and should be upheld.
The Court accordingly rejects the appeal and so decides.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93486 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD7993
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: BUS EIREANN
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. C.W.
170/93.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns the level of the overtime being worked by
a driver on the Wexford/Rosslare section of the Dublin/Rosslare
route. The worker concerned requested the particular route so
that he could obtain some overtime. There were objections by the
Waterford drivers who said the work was proper to the Waterford
district. Following a meeting with the N.B.R.U. a temporary
agreement existed whereby the Waterford drivers covered
Mon/Tue/Wed and the worker Thur/Fri/Sat.
Following a further meeting with the Unions on 29th March, 1993 a
new roster was drawn up giving the worker the Wexford/Rosslare
journey on Mondays and Thursdays. The worker considers this
roster unfair.
The dispute was referred to the Rights Commissioner and an
investigation took place on 12th July, 1993. The Rights
Commissioner found that while there might have been an element of
unfairness in the new roster he did not consider it possible to
overturn the agreement reached in March, 1993 and recommended that
the worker accept the present roster. The recommendation was
appealed by the worker in a letter to the Labour Court dated 14th
August, 1993 under Section 13(9), Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
The Court investigated the dispute on 16th September, 1993.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker applied for the Wexford/Rosslare section of the
journey so that he would be scheduled for overtime. Following
an objection by the Waterford drivers it was decided to split
the overtime with the worker being scheduled on Thur/Fri/Sat.
When the service reverted to a Friday only service for winter
the Waterford drivers operated it. The worker considered this
arrangement unfair.
2. Following further meetings between S.I.PT.U. and N.B.R.U.
the worker operates the 16.00 Dublin/Rosslare service on
Mondays and Thursdays. The worker still considers this roster
unfair.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The dispute arose out of an additional Dublin/Rosslare
service being provided by the Company. Because of an E.C.
regulation it is necessary for a different driver to do the
Wexford/Rosslare part of the journey so as to give the
Dublin/Wexford driver a break. This duty had always been done
by the Waterford drivers in Rosslare as it is in the Waterford
district. Both the N.B.R.U. and S.I.P.T.U. agreed to the
present roster which allows the worker to operate Monday and
Thursday 16.00 Dublin/Rosslare service.
2. The Company request the Court to uphold the Rights
Commissioners recommendation no. C.W. 170/93.
DECISION:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
is of the view that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
not unreasonable in the circumstances and should be upheld.
The Court accordingly rejects the appeal and so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
______________________
28th September, 1993. Deputy Chairman
C.O'N./J.C.