Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94244 Case Number: AD9452 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: ORAL B LABORATORIES IRELAND LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. CW1/94.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is of
the view that the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation should be
upheld.
The Court accordingly rejects the appeal and so decides.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Brennan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94244 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD5294
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
ORAL B LABORATORIES IRELAND LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation No. CW1/94.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The worker concerned has been employed in the Company
for the past ten years. He has worked as a stores
co-ordinator for nine years. Following a
re-organisation of the warehouse, Management advised the
worker in December 1993 that there would be a change in
his duties and responsibilities and that his grade would
be reduced from Grade 3 to Grade 2 with effect from 28th
February, 1994. The worker's wage would be reduced by
#38 per week on a phased basis over the first thirteen
weeks of 1994. The Union submitted a claim for
"red-circling" of the worker's post on a personal to
holder basis. Management rejected the claim.
2. The dispute was refereed to a Rights Commissioner for
investigation and recommendation On the 7th March, 1994
the Rights Commissioner issued his recommendation as
follows:
"I recommend that the Company offers and the worker
accepts the sum #4,000 in settlement of this dispute."
(The worker was named in the Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation).
On the 13th April, 1994 the Union appealed the
Recommendation to the Labour Court under Section 13 (9)
of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Court heard
the appeal on the 14th July, 1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company's proposal to demote the worker was a major
shock to him having worked nine out of his ten years in
the Company as a Stores Co-ordinator
2. The worker has suffered a substantial financial loss
which would continue into his retirement when he would
incur pension losses. (Details supplied to the Court).
3. The Union contends that the worker's post should be
red-circled on a personal-to-holder basis. There are
precedents for red-circling already in operation in the
Company whereby workers operating a four-shift cycle
have maintained a rate for shift which is now higher
than others who work on a four-cycle shift. This has
operated for some time without causing any industrial
relations difficulties.
4. The Court has previously recommended in favour of red
circling in similar situations where workers were
demoted following organisational changes in a Company
(LCR's 7253 and 14153 refer).
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Following the Company's decision to re-organise the
warehouse operation, Management created an additional
post at supervisory level thus eliminating the need for
the co-ordinating role of the worker concerned. The
Company had to withdraw the payments made to the worker
for co-ordinating duties. To continue to make those
payments would be unjustified and grossly unfair to
other warehouse operators.
2. To continue payment for co-ordinating duties now ceased
would create an unhealthy precedent where a number of
grades enjoy additional payments for increased
responsibility. These payments cease when the
responsibility changes.
3. The Company cannot agree to red-circling of the worker's
post. The present red-circling of workers' posts,
following an alteration of 4-cycle shift working, has
been the subject of on-going dispute among workers in
the area. The Company does not wish to exacerbate the
situation with an additional red-circled employee.
4. In an effort to reach agreement on the dispute the
Company was prepared to accept the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation awarding the claimant #4,000 even though
it exceeded the Company's original offer.
DECISION:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is of
the view that the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation should be
upheld.
The Court accordingly rejects the appeal and so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
21st July, 1994 Evelyn Owens
T.O'D./D.T. __________________
Deputy Chairperson
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.