Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94564 Case Number: AD9497 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: CONCERN - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE |
Appeal by Union against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation CW249/94.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
is of the view that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
reasonable in the circumstances and should be upheld.
The Court accordingly rejects the appeal and so decides.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94564 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD9794
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: CONCERN
and
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by Union against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation
CW249/94.
BACKGROUND:
2. Concern provided car parking facilities for their employees at
the rear of their old premises in Camden Street. As staff numbers
increased at Concern it became necessary to review the allocation
of car spaces. This was achieved on the basis of seniority. In
1994 Concern acquired a new building with car parking spaces
attached. The spaces were allotted as follows, 9 spaces to senior
management, 4 spaces allotted on a need to work basis and the
remainder allotted by lottery. The car spaces at the old building
in Camden Street were also included in the lottery. However, 3
employees objected to the new lottery system as they considered it
unfair to them because of their length of service with Concern.
3. The Union referred the dispute to a Rights Commissioner. The
Rights Commisioner heard the case on the 27th September, 1994 and
recommended that:- 'the 3 members accept the end of any seniority
or other rights to parking spaces from 31st May, 1995." Concern
accepted the recommendation.
4. The Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on
the 22nd November, 1994 under Section 13(9) of the Industrial
Relations Act, 1969. The Court heard the appeal on 8th December,
1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company is in breach of the Procedure Agreement
as the Union was not consulted regarding the implementation of
the new lottery arrangement for car parking spaces. Members
of the Union have lost one years parking due to the new rules
implemented by the Company.
2. Three of the Union's members were given assurances when
interviewed for a position with the Company that parking
facilities would be available to them.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. No guarantee was given to any staff member concerning
entitlement to car-parking spaces and the provision of car
parking facilities was never included in terms and conditions
of employment. There is no written agreement to support this
claim.
2. The car-parking facilities available to the Company have
been utilised to the maximum for the benefit of employees.
The Company believes that the manner in which car spaces have
been allocated is fair and equitable. This has been accepted
by a majority of the staff.
DECISION:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
is of the view that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
reasonable 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
22nd December, 1994 ____________
L.W./U.S. Chairman