FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : L.M. ERICSSON LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr McHenry Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Claim for disturbance money for 95 staff relocating from Company offices at Beech Hill, Clonskeagh, to Dun Laoghaire
BACKGROUND:
2. The claim is on behalf of 95 workers employed by the Company in its Professional Services/Customer Services Centre. The workers spend most of their time working overseas. In June, 1999, the Company decided to locate the different parts of Professional Services in Dun Laoghaire. This involved relocating the 95 workers concerned from Beech Hill, Clonskeagh. The Union sought compensation for the move, which the Company refused, and it was decided to refer the dispute to the Labour Relations Commission, following the intervention of a third party facilitator. The Company pays a 'city allowance' of £12.99 per day to all staff who work within a 12 miles radius of the GPO in Dublin, to offset costs involved in getting to and from sites.
As there was no agreement reached at the Labour Relations Commission, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 6th of June, 2000, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 11th of August, 2000.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. There was no consultation with the Union on the move to Dun Laoghaire.
2 The move is severe for the workers, particularly for those living close to the Beech Hill facility in Clonskeagh. The move has resulted in considerable extra time travelling to and from work. This imposes additional expense on the workers.
3. The city allowance covers expenses incurred by employees during the course of their normal duties and cannot be considered as compensation for the major disturbance caused by the move.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The move to Dun Laoghaire was to concentrate the resources of Professional Services and maximise business opportunities. Union representatives were involved in planning the operational move of equipment etc. to the new facility.
2. The workers concerned are already compensated for any change of location within the greater Dublin area, which includes Dun Laoghaire, by the payment of the city allowance.
3. The workers concerned are highly paid and spend more than 60% of their time working abroad.
4. There was no great inconvenience involved, and those who did suffer were treated sympathetically by the Company. Other employees relocated between the 2 sites without claiming compensation.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties, does not recommend concession of the Union's claim in this case.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
24th August, 2000______________________
conChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.