FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : IARNROD EIREANN - AND - NATIONAL BUS & RAIL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Unfair Treatment
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of its member in relation to alleged unfair treatment. The Union contends that the alleged unfair treatment was manifested in two ways; through the Company's use of a private investigator who carried out surveillance on the specialised unit in which the Worker was a part of at the time and secondly through the manner in which this unit was disbanded. Both of these issues have been previously discussed in a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission and the issues were considered to be resolved when agreement was reached between all parties concerned, with the exception of this Worker. The Worker has since become a member of the National Bus and Rail Union and has chosen to pursue his claim through the Union.
On the 8th March 2010 the Union referred the issue to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 27th August, 2010.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Worker strongly objected to theformer specialised unit's disbandment and does not consider the issues to be resolved.
2.The Worker did not accept the compensation payment that was offered when the issues were settled following Conciliation.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The issues were resolved by collective agreement when the majority of the unit accepted the compensation payment that was offered when the unit was disbanded.
2. The concession of the Worker's claim would have repercussions on the former members of the unit who have already accepted the issues as being settled in full.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the submissions of the parties in this case and recommends as follows:
Claim 1- Alleged unfair treatment arising from surveillance:
This matter was resolved to the satisfaction of the majority involved in the course of a meeting held on 15th May 2009.
Claim 2- Disbandment of Coastal Defence Gang:
This matter was resolved by a collective agreement between the Company and the Union of which the Claimant was then a member.
In all the circumstances the Court can see no merit in the Union's claims and it does not recommend their concession.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
10th September 2010______________________
SCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.