FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : TESCO, DOORADOYLE - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY MANDATE) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation IR9270/02/MR.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned is employed by the Company since June, 1975. She is currently employed as a Cash Office Chargehand at the Company's Store in Dooradoyle, Limerick.
The issue before the Court concerns the worker's continued refusal to complete the Cash Office Log Books which were introduced by the Company. The issue was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. His recommendation issued on the 14th of February, 2003, as follows:-
"I therefore recommend that the worker should withdraw her objections to working with these Log Books and that she and her colleagues should instead work with the Company to ensure that the Log Books are in full use at the Dooradoyle Store as soon as practicable. For its part, the Company should ensure that the Log Books are introduced at this store in a manner that is fair to all parties and that it recognises the co-operation of the staff involved."
(The worker was named in the Rights Commissioner's recommendation).
The Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on the 25th of March, 2003, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 15th of October, 2003, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker concerned has an exemplary work record and has co-operated with Management in the past.
2. The Cash Office staff including the worker concerned are fully occupied and do not have the time to take on the work associated with the Log Books.
3. The Union maintains that under the 1999 Company/Union Agreement "Building our Future" staff employed by the Company before the 12th of December, 1996, have the option to agree, or not, to changes that affect them in their job.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The completion of Log Books is not additional workload but a consolidation of existing procedures previously carried out in cash offices.
2. Every reasonable effort has been made to address any concerns and outstanding issues that the worker concerned may have in relation to the Log Books.
3. The Company has been more than fair and reasonable in ensuring the smooth implementation of the normal business changes. It is unreasonable that any member of staff has the right to veto changes that are important to the Company and acceptable to the vast majority of staff.
DECISION:
Having carefully considered the position of both sides to this appeal of a Rights Commissioner's recommendation, the Court concurs with the findings and recommendation of the Rights Commissioner. Therefore, the appeal is disallowed and Recommendation No.IR9270/02/MR is upheld.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
3rd November, 2003______________________
GB/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.