LCR14364

Subject:
Dispute concerning the application of colour vision testing.

Recommendation:
Colour Vision tests have been used in the Company for many years,
but, until recent years, have been of an unsophisticated nature.
The present dispute derives from the introduction of more
efficient tests and their wider application.

Having regard to the overriding safety factor, and to the
flexibility of employment necessary in the Company, the Court
considers that the Company requirements for Colour Vision testing
are reasonable and recommends that they be accepted by the Union.

Division: Mr Heffernan Mr McHenry Mr Walsh

Text of Document__________________________________________________________________

CD944 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14364


INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990

PARTIES:
IARNROD EIREANN

AND

C.I.E. TRADE UNION GROUP

SUBJECT:

1. Dispute concerning the application of colour vision testing.


BACKGROUND:

2. Following a general review of requisite medical standards,
the Company set out eyesight standards (the Ishihara chart
test) to be applied in respect of recruitment/promotion to
all operative grades, with effect from the 13th of August,
1991. 'Normal colour vision' is required in respect of all
grades except clerical and catering grades. The Company's
staff-numbers have been reducing since 1987 and the Company
is seeking increased interchangeability and flexibility
between grades.

For this reason, with particular regard to the area of
safety, the Company seeks to establish in advance its staff's
physical abilities. The Union claims that the Company is
setting too rigid a standard regarding colour vision and that
'normal colour vision' should not be a general recruitment
standard. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission and a conciliation conference was held on the 15th
of September, 1992, at which agreement was not reached. The
dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 4th of
January, 1994, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the
dispute on the 28th of February, 1994, the earliest date
convenient to both parties.



UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1. There is no justification for applying rigid colour
vision standards across the board. 'Normal colour vision' is
not needed in offices, workshops, stores and other areas not
involved in the operations side of the Company.

2. If colour vision deficiency is considered to be a
disability, then it is unreasonable for the Company to apply
the standard when there are many areas in the Company where
the disability would cause neither potential danger nor
inefficiency.

3. The Ishihara test is too rigid. Other colour vision
tests are available which would adequately cover any
requirement of the Company, even in the case of traffic
operation grades.

4. The Company's argument that workers may be required to
change grades in untenable. 'Suitability' has always been
the criterion applied by the Company concerning transfers.
If a transfer was sought to an area where 'normal colour
vision' was required for reasons of safety, a worker who
failed to meet the required colour vision standard could then
be deemed to be unsuitable.


COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. Medical and eyesight standards, including colour vision,
cannot become subject to bargaining. Safety cannot be
compromised.

2. Colour vision requirements are part and parcel of the
medical standards necessary to maintain optimum safety on the
railway.

3. The particular test used to determine colour vision is
sophisticated and is a recognised and applied international
standard for railways.

4. Apart from meeting safety requirements, the application
of appropriate medical and eyesight standards, in respect of
Iarnrod Eireann recruits, including workshop grades, is
necessary to provide for optimum flexibility and
interchangeability amongst a workforce which has been
reducing in size.

5. Where individual cases of colour deficiency have arisen
amongst existing staff, these have been dealt with by
accommodating the employee(s) concerned on restricted duties,
where possible. However, the capacity for such
accommodation, which impinges on deployment potential, is
limited and could not be sustained on an ongoing basis.


RECOMMENDATION:

Colour Vision tests have been used in the Company for many years,
but, until recent years, have been of an unsophisticated nature.
The present dispute derives from the introduction of more
efficient tests and their wider application.

Having regard to the overriding safety factor, and to the
flexibility of employment necessary in the Company, the Court
considers that the Company requirements for Colour Vision testing
are reasonable and recommends that they be accepted by the Union.
~

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court




10th March, 1994. Kevin Heffernan
M.K./A.L. _______________
Chairman


Note

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.