FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HSE - NORTH EASTERN AREA - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioners Recommendation R-032175-IR-05/DI
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns an appeal by the Union of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation R-032175-IR-05/DI. The dispute relates to the Union's claim for loss of earnings for its member following his relocation to new premises in Ballyconnell, Co Cavan, having previously been employed at St Felim's Hospital. The Union is claiming that the worker incurred a loss of earnings, as the rostering arrangements at the new site does not require the worker to work Sundays, Bank Holidays, or Night Duty which had been required at the previous site.
Management's position is that it was the worker who requested the transfer to the new position knowing there was no requirement to work night duty and subsequently
transferred to the new facility in Ballyconnell and received the appropriate compensation package.
The dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner who issued his Recommendation on 16th June 2005 as follows:
"In 2000 the claimant chose to transfer from a role that provided night work to a role as a laundry driver that did not have such a requirement. In 2001 he chose to transfer to Ballyconnell, a location nearer his home and received a compensation for doing so. The Labour Court has found against a claim for compensation in relation to the wards in Ballyconnell being integrated. The claimant also had choices that would have alleviated his loss.
For the above reasons I find against the claimant's claim for compensation.
On the 24th June 2005, the worker appealed the Recommendation of the Right's Commissioner in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court Hearing took place on5th April 2006.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. As a result of the transfer and the rostering arrangement in the new location, the worker incurred a loss of overtime earnings and Sunday/ Unsocial hours premium.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker requested that he be transferred to the new location as it was nearer to his home. He was fully aware of the rostering arrangements in the new location. The worker also received compensation for transferring to the new location.
2. It is unacceptable that the worker would request a transfer to be nearer his home and then claim loss of earnings as a result of the transfer. Management have made every effort to accomodate the worker by offering weekend work whenever requested.
DECISION:
The Court, having considered the submissions of the parties, does not see merit in the Union's claim, particularly in the light of LCR 17419.
Accordingly, the Court decides that the Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner be upheld and the appeal disallowed.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
24th April 2006______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.