Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94688 Case Number: LCR14673 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: IARNROD EIREANN - and - I.C.T.U. GROUP OF UNIONS |
Transfer between workshops.
Recommendation:
The Court has fully considered all of the views of the parties as
expressed in their oral and written submissions. In the
Company/Union Productivity Agreement the parties committed
themselves to full mobility of staff within Inchicore as a single
location and also addressed the vexed question of transfers by
agreeing to operate this arrangement in an equitable manner.
To ensure the Railway Workshops operate in an efficient and cost
effective manner there is a need to ensure there is full
co-operation between management and staff.
Thus arrangements should be made for the transfer of staff which
will enable the Company to meet their requirements whilst at the
same time demonstrating in an unambiguous way to the staff the
need for such transfers.
The Court to this end recommends the following procedures for
transfer of staff:-
1. That in accordance with the terms of the Productivity
Agreement full mobility of staff within Inchicore as a single
location is confirmed.
2. That where transfers are required the Company will seek in
the first instance volunteers from the designated group and
location.
3. In the event that volunteers are not forthcoming the
following arrangements shall apply:-
3.1 Staff to be transferred shall be selected generally on a
seniority basis, however, where specific skills,
experience or expertise is required, the Company may
select the appropriate staff member based on the
requirements needed by the receiving location.
3.2 Reasonable notice (a minimum of one week) shall be given
to staff selected for transfer.
However, in the case of emergencies or where such notice
is considered impractical, the member of staff together
with the Union Representative shall be notified as early
as possible of the transfer and the circumstances
requiring the transfer.
3.3 Six months after transfer the staff member may apply for
return to his/her designated location.
All such applications shall be considered in a
reasonable manner by the Company and responded to within
a two week period.
3.4 For special projects the number and type of staff
selected for transfer will be on the basis of the
manning and requirements of the project.
3.5 In the event of any dispute arising as a consequence of
a proposal to transfer, the transfer will take place if
necessary, under protest pending the issue being
resolved through the normal Company/Union procedures.
3.6 Staff transfers shall not be used as a mechanism for
dealing with internal shop discipline without first
having recourse to the normal disciplinary procedures in
advance of such a decision.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr McHenry Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94688 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14673
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
IARNROD EIREANN
AND
I.C.T.U. GROUP OF UNIONS
SUBJECT:
1. Transfer between workshops.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute before the Court concerns the procedures used to
transfer staff from workshop to workshop at the railway
workshops, Inchicore. Inchicore works is a large site
dedicated, in the main, to the building and repair of rail
vehicles. There are many specialised workshops on site which
are equipped accordingly to their specialisation.
In 1992, the Unions and the Company entered into a
productivity agreement. The agreement provided for full
mobility of all craftworkers/engineering operatives within
the Inchicore Works.
In early 1993, the Unions objected to some transfers on the
basis that the selection process used was not in accordance
with the spirit of the productivity agreement. Local level
discussions took place but no agreement was reached and the
matter was referred to the Labour Relations Commission.
Conciliation conferences were held on 19th October, 1993 and
4th February, 1994. Following the conciliation conference on
4th February, 1994 the Company put forward the following
proposal as a way of dealing with the issue of transfers:-
"(1) In accordance with the terms of the Productivity
Agreement full mobility of staff within Inchicore as a
single location is a requisite part of the framework
contained therein. When the Company has the need to
transfer staff for a substantive period from a
particular location in the Works they will actively seek
volunteers from within the designated group and location
to meet its requirements.
If no volunteers come forward or the volunteers do not
meet the requirements of the sending/receiving location
then the Company will select the appropriate staff for
the transfer as necessary on the basis of the
requirement of the receiving location and the needs of
the sending location.
(2) The Company is prepared to give reasonable notice of
say, one week to staff selected for inter shop
transfers except in the case of emergencies or
circumstances where such notice would be impractical in
meeting the Company immediate requirements.
(3) The Company would not condone the use of staff transfers
as a mechanism for dealing with internal shop discipline
without first having recourse to the normal disciplinary
procedures in advance of such a decision.
(4) Inchicore is a single location within the maintenance
and overhaul requirement of the Company and the
Productivity Agreements, therefore, all locations within
it are treated on an equal basis. Perceived differences
in conditions between workshops cannot be accepted as a
factor in the selection process where the need for
transfer of staff arises.
(5) In cases other than transfer between shops for a
substantive period of example, where skill enhancement
or specific training courses are required, staff will be
transferred for the duration of such modules and on
completion of same will return to the workshops location
from which they came.
(6) After a period of not less than six months, staff who
have been transferred may, if they so wish, apply in
writing for transfer back to their previous workshop.
The Company will give due consideration to such a
request and take into account the prevailing
circumstances in both locations and the availability of
suitable staff for exchange before reaching a decision.
All such requests will be replied to within two weeks of
receipt of same.
(7) For special projects the number and type of staff
selected for transfer will be on the basis of the
manning requirements for the project."
The Company's proposal was not acceptable to the Unions. As
no agreement could be reached the matter was referred by the
Labour Relations Commission to the Labour Court on 23rd
November, 1994 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial
Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on
18th January, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The survival of the Inchicore Works depends on the
efficient use of the workforce. In 1992 the Unions and
the Company entered into a Productivity Agreement
embracing the principles of World Class Manufacturing
which involves management and workers working together
in an atmosphere of mutual trust and understanding to
create greater efficiency. This will not be achieved if
management is perceived as using underhand methods in
dealing with transfers.
2. The question of staff transfers was the subject of
lengthy discussions prior to the Productivity Agreement.
The Unions agreed that flexibility should exist, to
allow the transfer of staff to carry out priority work.
The Unions attempted to ensure that transfers take place
only in circumstances where legitimate reasons existed.
3. The Unions were prepared to recommend to its members the
following proposals which the conciliation officer put
to the Company:-
(1) That the Company in the first instance would accept
volunteers and for this purpose internal
advertising would occur;
(2) That each employee has a recognised location;
(3) That for the purpose of skill enhancement,
employees can be transferred for particular
modules.
4. That where there is a surplus to manning level
requirements, members can be transferred from location
to location, providing the individual would have the
option of returning to his original location after a
given period, to be replaced by another employee.
This system to be widespread within locations to take
account of all employees.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company's right to utilise staff where they are
needed was reinforced in a list of agreed flexibilities
in the Productivity Agreement. In the case of
craftworkers and engineering operatives grades the
relevant clause states:-
"There will be full mobility of all
Craftworkers/Engineering Operatives within the
Inchicore Complex. The Company for its part will
undertake to operate this arrangement in an equitable
manner".
2. The Company has made two separate proposals to the
Unions on the issue of transfers. These proposals have
substantially diluted the mobility clause in the
Productivity Agreement.
3. The Company has given assurance that disciplinary
matters will not be a factor in the selection of staff
for transfer without first having recourse to the normal
disciplinary procedures in advance of such a decision.
4. There is a need for staff to be mobile within the
complex in order to be at the point where their services
are required. The amount of mobility required is
minimal and the majority of staff on site have worked in
the same location for many years.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has fully considered all of the views of the parties as
expressed in their oral and written submissions. In the
Company/Union Productivity Agreement the parties committed
themselves to full mobility of staff within Inchicore as a single
location and also addressed the vexed question of transfers by
agreeing to operate this arrangement in an equitable manner.
To ensure the Railway Workshops operate in an efficient and cost
effective manner there is a need to ensure there is full
co-operation between management and staff.
Thus arrangements should be made for the transfer of staff which
will enable the Company to meet their requirements whilst at the
same time demonstrating in an unambiguous way to the staff the
need for such transfers.
The Court to this end recommends the following procedures for
transfer of staff:-
1. That in accordance with the terms of the Productivity
Agreement full mobility of staff within Inchicore as a single
location is confirmed.
2. That where transfers are required the Company will seek in
the first instance volunteers from the designated group and
location.
3. In the event that volunteers are not forthcoming the
following arrangements shall apply:-
3.1 Staff to be transferred shall be selected generally on a
seniority basis, however, where specific skills,
experience or expertise is required, the Company may
select the appropriate staff member based on the
requirements needed by the receiving location.
3.2 Reasonable notice (a minimum of one week) shall be given
to staff selected for transfer.
However, in the case of emergencies or where such notice
is considered impractical, the member of staff together
with the Union Representative shall be notified as early
as possible of the transfer and the circumstances
requiring the transfer.
3.3 Six months after transfer the staff member may apply for
return to his/her designated location.
All such applications shall be considered in a
reasonable manner by the Company and responded to within
a two week period.
3.4 For special projects the number and type of staff
selected for transfer will be on the basis of the
manning and requirements of the project.
3.5 In the event of any dispute arising as a consequence of
a proposal to transfer, the transfer will take place if
necessary, under protest pending the issue being
resolved through the normal Company/Union procedures.
3.6 Staff transfers shall not be used as a mechanism for
dealing with internal shop discipline without first
having recourse to the normal disciplinary procedures in
advance of such a decision.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
13th February, 1995 Tom McGrath
F.B./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.