Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95661 Case Number: AD9616 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: BOART LONGYEAR LIMITED (Represented by THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - and - A WORKER;SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. CW116/95.
Recommendation:
The Court, having fully considered the oral and written
submissions of the parties, upholds the recommendation of the
Rights Commissioner and rejects the appeal of the Union.
The Court so decides.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95661 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD1696
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
BOART LONGYEAR LIMITED
(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.
CW116/95.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company manufactures percussive rock drilling equipment.
It has been located in Shannon since 1960 and employs 200
workers. The dispute concerns an appeal by the Union against
a written warning issued to the worker on 20th February,
1995.
The worker has been employed by the Company for 29 years and
presently holds the position of Production Supervisor.
Following a disagreement between the worker and the
Grinding-shop Supervisor in January, 1995, the Company issued
the warning to the worker for his "unco-operative,
intimidating and sometimes aggressive behaviour". The Union
referred the dispute to the Rights Commissioner. A hearing
took place on the 18th September, 1995. The Rights
Commissioner's Recommendation is as follows:-
"I recommend that the Union and the worker accept the
written warning issued by the Company."
The worker was named in the above recommendation.
The Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on
9th November, 1995, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took
place on 14th February, 1996, in Limerick.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker is the longest serving member of his
division. The Company has acknowledged that he is an
excellent worker. Whilst relations between the worker
and the Grinding-shop Supervisor were strained there was
not a refusal to communicate on job related matters, as
has been claimed by the Company. The situation has
improved considerably between the two workers.
2. The agreed disciplinary procedure provides only for a
verbal warning in the circumstance of the case. The
written warning made reference to a previous warning
which was expunged 3.5 years ago.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker's aggressive attitude towards his colleagues
has proved unacceptable at times over the years. The
Production Manager spoke to him in this regard in June,
1994. The Company was left with no alternative but to
issue a written warning in this particular instance. It
must maintain proper standards of behaviour and ensure
good relations between workers.
DECISION:
The Court, having fully considered the oral and written
submissions of the parties, upholds the recommendation of the
Rights Commissioner and rejects the appeal of the Union.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
12 March, 1996 Tom McGrath
C.O'N./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman