FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Upgrade and payment of car allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of a worker who is a Craft Gardener that he should have received an Acting Foreman rate from June, 2001 to June, 2005, having carried additional senior duties at Markiewicz Park, Ballyfermot during that period. The Union also claims that the worker concerned should have received an additional car allowance of €800 for managing the area over the four year period. Management rejected the claim. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held but agreement was not reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 14th August, 2006 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Court hearing was held on the 25th October, 2006.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. For the period in question the Claimant managed two areas whereby normally two Chargehands would be involved in managing the general operatives. The Claimant was the sole Chargehand to whom the G.O's reported.
2, The fact that Management had conceded at local level discussions and offered €1,800 by way of an ex-gratia payment signifies that the Council accepted there is merit in the Claimant's case.
3. It is long standing custom and practice agreement within the City Council that a Craft Gardener who acts up in a position of Assistant Foreman for a continuous period of more than two years, shall be confirmed in that position permanently.
4. Because he covered two areas the Claimant is entitled to an additional 50 % of the car allowance (€800) for managing these areas from 2001 to 2005.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Council does not accept that the Claimant managed two areas. He was aware of the structure and the travel allowance that existed in the area where he worked.
2. In 2004 proposals on a new supervisory structure and modernisation/ flexibility agreement were accepted. The appropriate grade for each area had been dealt with in this structure.
2. The Council has recognised that the Claimant may have carried out additional work during his assignment and proposed an ex-gratia payment amounting to €1,800 to the Claimant .
4. The Council rejected the claim for additional car allowance on the basis that the Claimant was paid the appropriate travel allowance for the area to which he was assigned.
RECOMMENDATION:
On the information before it the Court is not fully satisfied that the Claimant had accrued an entitlement to the acting up allowance on the basis of established custom and practice or otherwise. It is, however, clear that the Claimant did perform some work above the strict requirements of his grade over an extended period.
Having regard to all the circumstances of the case and in the interests of bringing finality to this dispute, the Court recommends that the Council offer and that the Claimant accepts an ex-gratia lump-sum of €5,000 in full and final settlement of his claims.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
31st October, 2006______________________
todChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.