FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : DULUX PAINTS IRELAND (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Disturbance
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the application to sales representatives of proposals regarding the relocation of the Company's warehouse and offices from Crumlin to Tallaght. This matter was the subject of a previous Labour Court hearing and in LCR19189 the Court recommended that the Union's claim should be discussed further between the parties at Conciliation. As the matter could not, however, be resolved at Conciliation it was referred back to the Court. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 9th October 2008, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union recommended the proposal to its members on the basis that it was to be applied to all employees operating out of the Crumlin premises.
2. The Company's argument that sales staff are not entitled to the relocation package because they have company cars is undermined by the fact that marketing staff, who also have company cars, received this relocation package.
3.The sales staff have had to endure longer travelling times to and from the new premises in Tallaght.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The sales staff are not office-based and are not, therefore, entitled to relocation money.
2. The sales staff are not required to call into the office regularly as they use mobile phones and laptops to keep in contact with the office.
3.The sales staff are supplied with company cars and all associated expenses are reimbursed by the Company; accordingly, the sales staff suffered no financial loss as a result of the relocation.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is clear to the Court that the agreement concluded between SIPTU and the Company, on foot of the LRC proposal of 9th February 2007, did not apply to those associated with this claim. Consequently it is clear beyond argument that the Company fulfilled its obligations under the agreement and that it acted properly and in good faith at all times in implementing the settlement as negotiated and agreed.
The Court also notes that an offer in settlement of the current dispute was made at Conciliation. In the circumstances of the case and in order to bring finality to this dispute the Court recommends that the Company should now offer and the Union should accept an ex-gratia payment of €500 per employee concerned in full and final settlement of this dispute. This amount should be paid in December 2008.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
20th October, 2008______________________
JMcCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.