Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95524 Case Number: AD9576 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: IARNROD EIREANN - and - A WORKER;SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation CW223/95.
Recommendation:
The Court, having considered all of the issues raised by the
parties in their oral and written submissions, finds that in
accordance with the payment structure agreed for training of
drivers on the DART system, the claimant is entitled to payment in
respect of the Sunday.
Accordingly, the Court upholds the appeal of the Union.
The Court so decides.
The Court supports the views of the Rights Commissioner that the
policy of restricting drivers to the DART, once they have started
training on actual driving duties on that system, should be
applied without qualification, whatever the need for short term
diesel drivers.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95524 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD7695
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
IARNROD EIREANN
AND
A WORKER
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation CW223/95.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker has been employed by the Company since the 10th of
June, 1981, and as a locomotive driver since April, 1983. He
commenced a three-week DART Driving Training Course on the
27th of February, 1995.
The initial two weeks of the course were theoretical, while
the third week was practical, under the supervision of a
qualified instructor. The worker requested to work on
Friday, the 17th of March, 1995 and Sunday, the 19th of
March, 1995, as the training course was not in session. He
was not yet qualified as a DART driver, therefore he applied
to drive a diesel train. His request was denied by the
Company, for safety reasons, as the methods of driving DART
and diesel trains were very different. The worker claimed
that he should be paid for both days, as he was available for
work.
Following local negotiations, the Company agreed to pay the
worker for Friday, the 17th of March, 1995 only. The dispute
was referred to the Rights Commissioner and a hearing took
place on the 28th of August, 1995. The Rights Commissioner's
recommendation was as follows:-
"I recommend that the Union accepts the Company decision
in this dispute".
The recommendation was appealed by the Union to the Labour
Court on the 14th of September, 1995, under Section 13(9) of
the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Labour Court heard
the appeal on the 27th of October, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. On previous occasions, drivers in their third week of
DART training have worked Sundays for the link from
which they came. A letter dated the 18th of February,
1983, from the Company to the Union states:-
"Transfer to EMU driving will be deemed to be
effective only after completion of conversion and
training programme, and when drivers are appointed
to the new EMU depots".
2. The worker was refused work at Connolly Station on the
grounds that, due to driver shortages, he had driven an
occupied DART train to Howth. The Union argues that
this was under supervision, and that all drivers in
training, drive unoccupied DART trains, also under
supervision.
3. Another driver, as recently as Saturday, the 19th of
August, 1995, was asked to work on Sunday, the 20th of
August, 1995, which was his third Sunday of DART
training. He declined, however, due to prior domestic
arrangements.
4. A number of meetings were held during the introduction
of the DART service in 1983. The Union refers to
paragraph 20 of a minute of a meeting on the 9th of
December, 1983, which says:-
"It was confirmed, following discussion, that
drivers in training would be paid rostered turn of
duty, inclusive of Sunday turn, if regularly
rostered for Sunday duty and in a position to work,
where rest periods would not be contravened".
A copy of the worker's roster shows that he regularly
worked on Sundays.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. It is not Company policy to allow a driver to revert
from DART driving to diesel driving for short periods of
time, for safety reasons. Driving procedures for DART
and diesel trains are vastly different.
2. The worker was not treated less favourably than any
other driver, as drivers in training do not normally
work on the third Sunday, except in extreme
circumstances.
3. Because Friday, the 17th of March, 1995, was a Public
Holiday, the worker was not a qualified DART driver
until Monday, the 20th of March, 1995. He was,
therefore, unable to work as a DART driver on either the
17th or the 19th of March, 1995.
4. It is not Company policy to pay a worker for time not
worked. To help resolve the issue, the Company paid the
worker for Friday, the 17th of March, 1995 but is not
convinced that he should be paid for Sunday, the 19th of
March, 1995.
5. The Company requests that the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation be upheld, as other drivers, in similar
circumstances, may also claim payment for time not
worked.
DECISION:
The Court, having considered all of the issues raised by the
parties in their oral and written submissions, finds that in
accordance with the payment structure agreed for training of
drivers on the DART system, the claimant is entitled to payment in
respect of the Sunday.
Accordingly, the Court upholds the appeal of the Union.
The Court so decides.
The Court supports the views of the Rights Commissioner that the
policy of restricting drivers to the DART, once they have started
training on actual driving duties on that system, should be
applied without qualification, whatever the need for short term
diesel drivers.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
13th November, 1995 Tom McGrath
D.G./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman