Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94125 Case Number: AD9451 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: IARNROD EIREANN - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. CW311/93 regarding claim for compensation for loss of overtime earnings.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions from the parties, the Court is
satisfied that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is correct
in the circumstances and should be upheld.
The Court accordingly does not find the appeal sustained and so
decides.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94125 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD5194
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
IARNROD EIREANN
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation No. CW311/93 regarding claim for compensation
for loss of overtime earnings.
BACKGROUND:
2. The two workers concerned in this dispute are employed by the
Company as depot-persons in Ballina station. In December,
1991, management brought into effect changes in procedures
and work practices which had regard to safety. These changes
created additional overtime in the station which lasted until
June, 1992, when an additional depot-person was employed.
The new depot-person was incorporated into the roster in
April, 1993.
In July, 1993, the Union Submitted a claim on behalf of the
workers concerned for compensation for the loss of overtime
earnings. The Union claims that the two workers suffered a
considerable loss of overtime earnings as a result of the
changes introduced in April, 1993. The Company rejected the
claim.
The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for
investigation and recommendation under section 13(9) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969. On 2nd February, 1994, the
Rights Commissioner recommended as follows:-
"I recommend that the Union accepts that no compensation is
payable in these instances".
The Rights Commissioner's recommendation was appealed by the
Union to the Labour Court on 24th February, 1994. The Labour
Court heard the appeal on 9th June, 1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned have suffered a considerable loss
in earnings as a result of the changes introduced by the
Company in April, 1993.
2. Prior to April, 1993 the workers were rostered to work
every second Saturday/Sunday. Currently they work one
Saturday/Sunday in three and fewer opportunities exist
for weekday overtime.
3. The workers have suffered losses of approximately #1,500
per annum. These losses will also occur in future
years. In similar circumstances workers have received
substantial compensation for their loss.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Management had no alternative but to put these
additional arrangements in place, as they came about, on
foot of a local authority recommendation, following an
accident.
2. The Company is not obliged to maintain the earnings of
its employees from year to year, given the changes that
occur in the workplace.
3. One of the criteria used in the past to support loss of
earnings claims is in circumstances where savings accrue
to the Company. In this instance there are no savings
to the Company.
4. Because of commercial considerations, the Company has
not been able to pass on the cost of employing an
additional depot-person to its customers.
5. An assessment of the workers' earnings in the period
1991 to 1994 showed that overtime earnings were
maintained.
6. Opportunities to work overtime has always fluctuated,
depending on business demands at Ballina, but
opportunities continue to exist and indications are that
overtime has increased and not diminished as claimed.
DECISION:
Having considered the submissions from the parties, the Court is
satisfied that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is correct
in the circumstances and should be upheld.
The Court accordingly does not find the appeal sustained and so
decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
6th July, 1994 Evelyn Owens
F.B./D.T. __________________
Deputy Chairperson