Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9532 Case Number: AD9512 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: KILKENNY COUNTY COUNCIL (THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - and - A WORKER;SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. BC306/94.
Recommendation:
Having considered the appeals from the parties and, in particular,
taking into account the length of time the employee had been in
receipt of overtime resulting from the requirement that he work
the hours associated with the duty, the Court is of the view that
the paragraph in which the Rights Commissioner made an award of
#2,823 be upheld but finds that the final paragraph is unnecessary
and should be struck out.
The Court so decides.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9532 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD1295
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
KILKENNY COUNTY COUNCIL
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
A WORKER
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No.
BC306/94.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns a claim by the worker for compensation
for loss of overtime as a result of his transfer from refuse
collection to general road work in April, 1993.
The County Council made an offer of compensation to the
worker which was rejected and the dispute was referred to the
Rights Commissioner. At a hearing on 14th December, 1994, it
was agreed that, prior to his transfer, the worker earned
approximately #4,500 per annum on overtime. Following his
transfer, his overtime earnings were #2,618 per annum. The
Rights Commissioner's recommendation follows:-
"In the light of the above I recommend that Kilkenny
County Council pay the worker the sum of #2,823
representing 18 months net loss of earnings in the
context of the figures set out above.
I note that the Union official did make the point that
there was every likelihood that the current overtime
both on roads and on refuse collecting worked by the
worker concerned may be drastically reduced in the near
future. Obviously if this should happen within 12
months of my recommendation then the parties should, if
they so wish come back to me for a supplementary
recommendation."
Both the worker and the Union official were named in the
Rights Commissioner's Recommendation.
The Union is seeking compensation at a rate of five years
net loss. The County Council is offering six months net
loss.
The dispute was appealed by the County Council to the Labour
Court on 17th January, 1995, under Section 13(9) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took
place on 7th February, 1995, in Kilkenny.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker still has a number of years to serve with the
County Council before he retires. He will not earn the
same level of overtime on general road work as he would
have on refuse collection, which is deemed a promotional
opportunity.
2. The worker earns some overtime as a relief refuse
collector at present. This overtime would not be
available in the future if, as proposed, the refuse
collection services is transferred to the private sector
on a contract basis. Overtime in general is not
guaranteed on road work.
COUNTY COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker was redeployed as a result of the Council's
decision, in 1992, to rationalise the refuse collection
service. The hours of overtime worked by each crew
member were reduced, as was the size of the crew - from
a driver and three helpers to a driver and two helpers.
2. The worker is still in receipt of considerable overtime
each year. Overtime on roads is expected to rise over
the next number of years due to the Council's decision
to allocate extra funds for the maintenance of county
roads. Overtime is not guaranteed and is subject to the
availability of Council funds.
DECISION:
Having considered the appeals from the parties and, in particular,
taking into account the length of time the employee had been in
receipt of overtime resulting from the requirement that he work
the hours associated with the duty, the Court is of the view that
the paragraph in which the Rights Commissioner made an award of
#2,823 be upheld but finds that the final paragraph is unnecessary
and should be struck out.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
17th February, 1995 Evelyn Owens
C.O'N./D.T. ____________
Chairman