FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : AER RIANTA - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Compensation for euro changeover.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union has submitted a claim for compensation in relation to the euro changeover on behalf of seven staff employed at the Company's cash office at Dublin Airport. The Union claims that the staff in the cash office worked long hours and carried out all the tasks required of them to ensure a smooth changeover to the euro.
Management rejected the claim. It states that the restructured pay scales for administrative staff in October, 2001, were agreed with the unions as part of an overall productivity agreement which provided for "cost effectiveness/efficiency.
As no agreement was possible between the parties the dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held on the 9th January, 2002, but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 13th of February, 2002, under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on the 22nd of March, 2002.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The staff had to work a lot of overtime to ensure the smooth changeover to the euro.
2. Financial institutions such as the banks and cash-in -transit companies negotiated a financial settlement with their employees in relation to the euro changeover.
3. The cash office at Dublin Airport is similar to a bank, in that it handles a substantial amount of cash each day, as well as foreign currencies taken in at the Duty Free shops.
4. The staff in the cash office have worked very hard in relation to the euro changeover and should be compensated accordingly.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. There is no validity in the Union's claim in relation to the administrative staff employed in the cash office.
2. The Company restructured the pay scales for administrative staff in October, 2001, which gave them substantial pay increases.
3. The agreement provided for the Company and the Unions to work jointly to maximize cost effectiveness and cost efficiency across all areas of the Company.
4. The euro changeover was a compliance issue and did not afford the Company an opportunity to increase revenue, rather it was a cost on the operation to make the changeover arrangements.
5. There is no comparison between staff employed in the cash office at Aer Rianta and financial institutions or security firms who negotiated settlements during the euro changeover.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has carefully considered the submissions of the parties. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, the Court does not accept that the inconvenience suffered by the claimants in the Euro changeover was of such an exceptional degree as to warrant the payment of compensation.
Accordingly, the Court does not recommend concession of the Union's claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
8th April, 2002______________________
LW/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.