FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : SECURICOR SECURITY SERVICES (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioners Recommendation IR12770/02/MR.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned commenced employment with the Company in February, 1991, as a Static Guard. In 1995, he was appointed to the position of Supervisor. He worked as a Supervisor on a particular site until November, 2002, when the Company lost the contract due to the closure of the plant concerned. There was no other supervisory position available at the time. The Company offered to temporarily re-locate the worker concerned to another site at regular security staff level. He would continue to receive the supervisor's allowance on a red circled basis for a period of six months and would be appointed to the next available supervisory position.
The Union did not see this as a realistic offer.
The issue was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. His recommendation issued on the 14th of February, 2003, as follows:-
"Accordingly, I recommend that the Company should agree, as an exceptional measure, to allow the worker to retain the supervisor's allowance on a red-circled basis up to the end of 2003, while at the same time confirming their offer to appoint him to the next available supervisory position, subject to client approval. The Company should also agree, again as an exceptional measure, to allow the worker to wear the supervisor's uniform if he so wishes as long as he continues to work at his present site.
In return, the worker and Union should accept the above, plus the Company's offer to increase his working hours, as a reasonable accommodation between the parties pending the appointment of the worker to the next available supervisory position."
(The worker was named in the Rights Commissioner's recommendation).
The Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on the 28th 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 seeks an agreed severance package as the only realistic option.
2. The worker concerned has suffered a loss of income.
3. Given the extreme and unusual circumstances of the case the issue should be dealt with as a redundancy situation. The worker concerned should receive five weeks' pay per year of service plus his statutory entitlement.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. All reasonable attempts have been made to facilitate the worker concerned. A number of options have been presented which are unacceptable.
2. There is no suitable supervisory position available at this time. The Company has confirmed that it will facilitate the worker concerned as soon as a suitable position becomes available.
3. Any settlement outside that recommended by the Rights Commissioner would cause commercial difficulties with clients and could result in a loss of contracts.
DECISION:
The Court has considered the submissions of both sides to this appeal of a Rights Commissioners recommendation. In general terms the Court concurs with the findings and recommendation of the Rights Commissioner. However, the Court recommends that the recommendation should be amended by the following:-
At the end of 2003, discussions should have commenced between the parties on one of the following options for the claimant
- remain with the Company at regular security staff level with an option to buy out his supervisory role status,
- or
- discussions should take place under Clause 24 of the Company/Union Agreement with a view to reaching an acceptable severance agreement for the claimant.
The Rights Commissioner's recommendation is varied accordingly.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
20th October, 2003______________________
GB/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.