FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL - AND - ELECTRICAL FOREMEN (REPRESENTED BY TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioners Recommendation IR19528/04/GF.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between Dublin City Council and the TEEU in relation to the inclusion of Electrical Foremen employed in Electrical Services Division, on the emergency on-call roster, which has traditionally been confined to Inspectorial Grades. The parties are also in dispute over the issue of the supervision of weekend overtime although this matter was not dealt with by the Rights Commissioner and is therefore not before the Court on this occassion.
The Union is claiming that the Electrical Foremen be placed on the on-call roster as is standard practise in the Public Lighting Division.
Dublin City Council's position is that the current system has been in place for over 20 years and has proved successful and any alterations or addition would prove costly and ineffective.
The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. His findings and recommendation issued on the 26th November, 2004, as follows:-
"I have not been influenced by the reasons advanced by the respondent. I must come to the conclusion that the TEEU proposal to enlarge the circle is the fairest system to deal with this problem. I would recommend in favour of the Union".
On the 5th January, 2005 the Employer appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 27th April, 2005.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. As regards the emergency on-call roster, the current system is the most effective way of dealing with emergency after hours calls. Any changes to the roster would lead to operational inefficiencies and increased unwarranted costs. Local management reserves the right to determine the most effective service delivery.
2. In an attempt to resolve the dispute, Dublin City Council offered to include four foremen on the emergency on-call roster.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In the Public Lighting Division Foremen have access to the emergency on-call roster. It is unfair and unnaceptable that foremen in the Electrical Services Division are being excluded from the roster.
DECISION:
The Court notes that the Rights Commissioner recommended that the panel be expanded but he did not specify to what extent.
The Union's position is consistent with the practice in other sections involved in the delivery of a similar service and is, on that account, reasonable.
Nonetheless the Court is conscious of the length of time during which the current
arrangements have been in place without objection from the Foremen. In these circumstances the Court is of the view that the City Council's offer to expand the panel by the inclusion of four foremen is reasonable and should be accepted. The parties should meet to discuss how this proposal is to be implemented.
The arrangement, including the number of Foremen on the panel, should be reviewed after three years.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
13th May, 2005______________________
AH/MB.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.