Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95129 Case Number: LCR14750 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: SUTCLIFFE CATERING (IBEC) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Disturbance money.
Recommendation:
The Court having considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their oral and written submissions finds that grounds
have not been adduced to recommend concession of the Union's
claim.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr Pierce Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95129 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14750
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
SUTCLIFFE CATERING
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Disturbance money.
BACKGROUND:
2. Sutcliffe Catering is contracted by Insurance Corporation of
Ireland (I.C.I.) to manage its canteen facilities at its unit
in Burlington Road. The Union is seeking compensation for
its members for working in adverse conditions as a result of
renovations in the kitchen and staff canteen areas. The
renovations lasted for a period of 2 months. The Company
rejected the Union's claim.
A number of meetings took place between the Union and Company
in relation to the claim but no progress was made. The
dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission.
Conciliation conferences took place on 30th March, 1994 and
13th October, 1994 but no agreement was reached. The dispute
was referred to the Labour Court by the Labour Relations
Commission on the 16th February, 1995 in accordance with
Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The
Court investigated the dispute on 13th April, 1995 (the
earliest date suitable to the parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union wrote to the Company on 8th December, 1993
requesting compensation for its ten members. The
workers had to endure adverse working conditions such as
noise levels, dust, smells and general inconvenience
during the renovations. The renovation work continued
for 8 weeks during which time the workers concerned
continued to provide the highest standard of service
possible despite the working conditions.
2. The workers concerned consider that there is merit in
their claim for compensation as they were the staff who
were most affected by the renovations. The staff of
I.C.I. were not subjected to the same conditions as the
builders stopped working when they commenced their
lunch. The Company made a small gesture to the workers
by taking them out for a drink when the renovations were
completed. This did not address the claim for
compensation. The claim for 2 weeks pay is not
substantial nor unreasonable and should be conceded by
the Company.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Sutcliffe Catering is a contract catering Company with
approximately 100 contracts in Ireland. Insurance
Corporation of Ireland (I.C.I.) is a client company. In
December 1993, renovation work commenced in the kitchen
area. The kitchen was sealed off to comply with hygiene
regulations. This helped to reduce both dust and smell
levels in the immediate area. Extra catering staff were
employed to assist during the renovations and everything
possible was done to minimise the inconvenience. The
renovation work represents a long term investment by
I.C.I. to improve facilities for all concerned.
2. Any complaints received by Management from the catering
staff in relation to the renovation work were dealt with
promptly. Management also requested the builders to
stop work at 2.00 p.m. to allow the canteen staff to
have their lunch in peace. This type of work occurs
from time to time in many of the Company's units but
compensation payments are never made to employees who
experienced similar disruptions. Any payment to
employees on this occasion would create a very dangerous
precedent for the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court having considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their oral and written submissions finds that grounds
have not been adduced to recommend concession of the Union's
claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
3rd May, 1995 Tom McGrath
L.W./M.M. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.