AD1010

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/09/400

APPEAL DECISIONNO.AD1010

(r-072557-ir-08/RG)

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969

PARTIES :

IARNROD EIREANN

- AND -

A WORKER
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)

DIVISION :

Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Doherty
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill

SUBJECT:
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-072557-ir-08/RG.

BACKGROUND:

2. This dispute concerns the Worker's claim that he was denied access to a termination bonus, which he believes he was entitled to, on his exit from the Company as part of a voluntary severence package. The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 13th May, 2009 the Rights Commissioner issued the following Recommendation:-

- “I recommend that the Company pay the Claimant a sum of €10,000 in full and final settlement of his claim against the Company. This recommendation is red-circled to the Claimant and cannot be used as a precedent in any other cases within the Company. This sum to be paid within six weeks of the date of this Recommendation”.
On the 29th May, 2009, the Employer appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.A Labour Court hearing took place on the 19th March, 2010, the earliest date suitable to the parties.

COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1. Voluntary severance packages are voluntary and require the agreement of both employer and employee.

2. The Worker was not entitled to a termination bonus because he did not accept the voluntary severance package within the prescribed period.

3.The Worker accepted a significant ex-gratia payment as part of his voluntary severance package 'in full and final settlement of all outstanding liabilities' in respect of his employment with the Company.

UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The Worker indicated his acceptance of the voluntary severance package to the Company on several occasions within the prescribed period.

2. The Company told the Worker that he could not leave the Company until a replacement was trained.

3. The Worker has suffered significant financial loss as a result of the Company's actions.

DECISION:

Having regard to all the circumstances of this case the Court regards the Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner as reasonable.

Accordingly, the Court affirms the Recommendation and the Company's appeal is disallowed.

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court

Kevin Duffy
26th March, 2010______________________
JMcCChairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.