LCR16525

FULL RECOMMENDATION CD/00/134 RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR16525 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : IARNROD EIREANN - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY THE NATIONAL BUS AND RAIL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr McHenry Worker Member: Mr. Somers

SUBJECT:
1. Promotion


BACKGROUND:

2. The dispute concerns the worker who is a locomotive driver based in Connolly Station. In August, 1998 the worker applied for a position as a Senior Clerical Officer, grade 1 (SCO 1). The position involved the duties of Traffic Regulator, and was based in the Central Traffic Control (C.T.C.) in Connolly Station. The C.T.C was built approximately 20 years ago to house signalmen whose job it was to route and signal trains along a given path (a full list of duties associated with the complex was supplied to the Court). The worker was advised that he was not available to apply for a promotional clerical position, and was not considered for the job. The worker claims that he also applied for a vacant position in September, 1999, but received no response from the Company.

In the past, similar disputes had been referred to the Labour Relations Commission, and at a conciliation conference on the 7th of November, 1997, a proposal issued which recommended that the parties enter negotiations on changes required by the Company on eligibility for promotion posts.

The Union referred the case to the Labour Court on the 24th of February, 2000, in
accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court
hearing took place on the 19th of May, 2000. The worker agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation.

• 
  

UNION'S ARGUMENTS3. 1. Both parties appeared to have accepted the proposals from the conciliation conference on the 7th of November, 1997, but two and a half years later there is still discrimination against rail operative staff who apply for vacant positions such as the C.T.C. regulator. This discrimination affects a large number of workers.

2. The worker concerned has been a train driver for the past 18 years, and is fully conversant with all aspects of train operations. He should be eligible to apply for a regulator job in the normal way.COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The practice in the Company and in C.I.E. has been that promotional clerical positions were not open to non-clerical staff. This arrangement has been in place since the inception of C.I.E. in the 1940s. In the present dispute, the Company had no choice but to comply with the existing arrangements.

2. The Company has continuously tried to process the issue as proposed at the conciliation conference in November, 1997. The barrier in question exists for clerical positions only. Executive and management positions are open to all staff, subject to qualification.


RECOMMENDATION:

The Court notes the Company aspiration to have promotional opportunities available to all employees, on an open basis. The Court is conscious of the restrictions that have been placed on entry to the Clerical Grades other than at base level, and accepts that the Company is using its best endeavours to remove this restrictive practise.

The Court fully supports the efforts to have equal access to promotional opportunities available across the Company, and recommends that discussions on this issue be expedited.



Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Finbarr Flood
30th May, 2000______________________
con/conChairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.