FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : EASTERN HEALTH BOARD - AND - IRISH NATIONAL PAINTERS & DECORATORS TRADE GROUP DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr McHenry Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation IR274/00/JH.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1992, the Eastern Health Board introduced a computerised maintenance system at Cherry Orchard Engineering Base. This replaced the old manual system.
The Company claims that the new computerised system provided for the creation of three new supervisory posts. It states that it was understood that the new structure replaced the existing chargehand arrangements.
The Union rejects the Company's claim that the new computerised system replaced the old chargehand arrangements. It claims that there was no agreement to eliminate any chargehand posts and that the current standing up arrangements should continue.
The dispute was the subject of a Rights Commissioner hearing which took place on the 5th of April, 2000. The following is the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation:
"On the basis of the evidence presented, I am satisfied that it was the Board's intention to abolish the position of chargehand in the re-structuring. I am concerned however, about the position of the most senior painter remaining, to whom the effect of the re-structuring was not clearly stated. I recommend, therefore, that this latter employee be allowed to act up for the chargehand until the retirement of the chargehand at which time the practice will cease. This arrangement is confined to the one person (present at the hearing) and cannot be claimed by others."
The Union appealed the Recommendation to the Labour Court on the 1st of June, 2000, in accordance with Section 13 (9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 20th of July, 2000.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. It was always the practice that where a chargehand was absent through annual leave or sick leave, that the next most senior painter would act up in that position.
2. It was never agreed, nor is it recorded, that the chargehand grade would be abolished or that acting up arrangements for that position would cease.
3. The group of unions are currently in discussion with Management concerning the existing arrangements and structures within the organisation. The matter could be resolved in this context.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Following agreement with the group of unions and the creation of the three new supervisory posts, it was understood that this replaced the chargehand arrangement.
2. The position of chargehand was abolished following the introduction of computerisation.
3. If the group of unions had any reservations concerning the introduction of the new computer system in 1992, they should have sought clarification and not wait for eight years after its introduction to lodge a complaint.
4. The new arrangement obviated the need for a chargehand grade as supervisory responsibility, time-keeping and monitoring of work progress is now undertaken by either the Assistant Foreman / Foreman.
DECISION:
Having investigated both sides of this appeal, the Court is aware that there are ongoing discussions regarding existing agreements and structures, which may impact on the broader issue of the abolition of the Chargehand grade. However, on the narrower issue of the standing up arrangements of the appellant, the Court upholds the Rights Commissioner's recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
2nd August, 2000.______________________
LW/BCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.