FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : BERU ELECTRONICS GMBH (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioners Recommendation IR11439/02/LM.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company was established in Tralee in 1985. It manufactures glowplugs for diesel cold start engines. It currently employs two hundred and fifty staff. The worker concerned is employed by the Company since June, 2000, as a general operative.
On the 16th of August, 2002, the worker concerned received a verbal warning for allegedly failing to keep his workstation tidy.
The issue was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. Her recommendation issued on the 25th of June, 2003. She concluded that the Company acted reasonably and complied with the procedures as outlined in the Labour agreement. She recommended that the Company's position is upheld and the claim fails.
The Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on the 29th of July, 2003, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 11th of November, 2003 the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The machine in question had no camera installed which led to a disproportionate amount of swarf (waste metal rings) being produced.
2. The worker concerned maintains that the disciplinary action was as a result of complaints he made regarding Health and Safety.
3. There was no definitive reason given for issuing the verbal warning.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker concerned was requested on several occasions to clear up his workstation.
2. The Company had no option but to issue the worker concerned with a verbal warning for the unacceptable behaviour in the performance of his duties.
3. The warning which was issued, has since expired and has been removed from the worker's file.
DECISION:
The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties is satisfied that an incident did take place on the 29th July and that the complainant was made aware of the management's dissatisfaction. While time elapsed before action was taken by management, the Court is satisfied that this disciplinary action was not as a result of complaints he made about the Health and Safety.
The Court notes this matter has been removed from the claimant's personnel file and cannot be used in any future discussions. The Court taking into account all aspects of the case, as outlined, upholds the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation and rejects the appeal.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
1st December, 2003______________________
GB/MB.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.