Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94290 Case Number: LCR14510 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: ALLIED IRISH BANKS FINANCE AND LEASING - and - IRISH BANK OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION (I.B.O.A. |
Dispute concerning relocation payment.
Recommendation:
The Court has fully examined all of the views made by the parties
in their oral and written submissions. The Court finds given all
of the circumstances of this case that the employees should be
paid an amount of #250 in full and final settlement of their claim
for relocation.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94290 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14510
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
ALLIED IRISH BANKS FINANCE AND LEASING
AND
IRISH BANK OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION (I.B.O.A.)
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning relocation payment.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. A.I.B. Finance and Leasing is the asset financing
subsidiary of A.I.B. Group in Ireland. It employs 250
staff and approximately 198 work in Sandyford Head
Office. The dispute concerns a claim by the Association
for payment of a disturbance/relocation payment to
workers who moved from branches in Mount Street, Baggot
Street, Rathmines and Drumcondra to the new Head Office
in Sandyford.
2. The Association submitted a claim for relocation
payments for staff on 10th February, 1993. The Bank
rejected this, stating that it had advised the
Association in June, 1992 of the discontinuation of
disturbance payments with effect from September, 1992.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission and a conciliation conference was held on
16th February, 1994. Agreement could not be reached and
the dispute was referred by the Labour Relations
Commission to the Labour Court on 16th May, 1994. The
Court investigated the dispute on 20th June, 1994.
ASSOCIATION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The staff's co-operation in moving to the new Sandyford
Head Office ensured a speedy and efficient transition
with no adverse effect on customer service.
2. The Bank is achieving considerable savings by changing
from four locations to one (Sandyford).
3. The claim for relocation payments is justified, based on
precedent within the Bank itself and elsewhere in the
Group. In 1980, staff moved from Baggot Street to
Bankcentre and received a relocation payment. More
recently in 1990, when Bankcentre was being refurbished,
staff moved to Mount Street and received a substantial
lump sum.
4. Since 1978, when the transfer out to the new corporate
Headquarters in Ballsbridge began, a principle was
established which formed the basis of compensatory
payments for relocations throughout the Bank.
BANK'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Relocation payments are now an outmoded convention.
Within the leasing industry, competitors of the Bank do
not make any disturbance payments to their staff.
2. The Bank provided sufficient notice to the Association
of its intention to discontinue relocation payments.
3. The relocation payment referred to by the Association
specifically relates to an arbitration finding which
related to a unique once-off situation. No agreement
was put in place regarding any future payments.
4. The move to Sandyford has provided staff with a
significantly improved working environment.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has fully examined all of the views made by the parties
in their oral and written submissions. The Court finds given all
of the circumstances of this case that the employees should be
paid an amount of #250 in full and final settlement of their claim
for relocation.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
25th July, 1994 TomMcGrath
P.O.C./M.M. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.