FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : CWS NATIONAL LINEN (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Refusal to Handle 'Fem Bins'
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between CWS National Linen and SIPTU in relation to a refusal on the part of the workers to handle "fem bins" sanitary products. The Union's position is that the particluar product is classified as medical waste and should be dealt with under the strict guidelines in existence on such issues.
It also contends that in comparable employments such waste products are contracted out for collection by medical waste specialists. The Company position is that it is operating in extremely competitive circumstances and has extended its service to remain viable into the future. It further contends that it has offered protective equipment and further training if necessary to alleviate the concerns of the workforce.
The dispute was not resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Comission. As agreement was not reached the matter was referred to the Labour Court on 15th August, 2008 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations ct, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 25th September, 2008.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The product involved in this dispute is classified as medical waste and should be collected in compliance with medical waste guidelines.
2 Comparable employments contract out such tasks to specialists in that particular area.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The Company is operating in a very competitive environment and has extended its service provision into this area to ensure continued viability into the future.
2 Management has offered additional training and personal protective equipment in an attempt to alleviate the concerns of the workers.
RECOMMENDATION:
Bearing in mind the assurances given by the Company regarding sensitivities to hygiene and dignity, the Court sees no alternative to the drivers co-operating with the work in question and recommends accordingly.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
7th October 2008______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.