FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : BUS EIREANN - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Dispute in relation to rest days and roster
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between Bus Eireann and SIPTU in relation to the rest days and rostering arrangements of a Bus Driver employed by the Company. The Company previously provided a non-stop Dublin to Limerick service at 8.30am and 13.30pm. Two drivers covered the routes prior to the 13.30pm service ceasing and had alternate Friday/Sunday and Saturday/Sunday rest days.
It is claimed that both drivers were given an option to remain on the other route which was also due to be cancelled at a later date. TheUnion further contends that the Claimant in this case was put under considerable pressure to accept new rostering arrangements which would affect his weekend rest days. It claims that the agreement concluded on the rostering is void and is seeking that an arrangement be put in place to afford the Worker Saturday / Sunday rest days and payment for three days owing to the Worker.
Management's position is that the Driver accepted the rostering arrangements and the agreement concluded between the parties clarifed the position going forward. Management further contends that it had no difficulty which driver left the route and that this was made clear to all concerned and that all matters were agreed between the parties.
On the 19th February 2008, the worker referred the matter to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on 2nd September, 2008.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The Worker was put under considerable prressure to accept the new rostering arrangements. The Worker subsequently approached management and sought to remain on the roster with Saturday/ Sunday rest days. Management refused to accede to his request.
2 The worker, as the Senior Driver, had an entitlement to remain on the route with his established rest days.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The Driver chose to stop working the route when the 13.30pm service ceased. Management would have had no difficulty if the Worker had wished to remain on the route on the basis of his seniority.
2 Concession of the claim, particularly with regard to the Saturday/Sunday rest days' would have serious repercussive effects within the organisation as there are already excessive staff members with such rest days.
3 The issue in dispute was referred to the internal dispute resolution forum and recommendations were made which the Company were prepared to implement.
RECOMMENDATION:
In the Court’s view a sufficient effort has not been made to find a resolution of the current impasse within the terms of the recommendation of the internal Industrial Relations Forum.
The Court recommends that the parties now engage in a process of discussions in which all possible options are considered with a view to finding an agreed accommodation acceptable to both the worker and the Company.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
22nd September 2008______________________
AHChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.