FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : ISS FACILITY SERVICES (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Appeal of Recommendation of a Rights Commissioner R-095543-Ir-10/GC
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker was initially employed by Chubb Ireland Limited in 2005. In April, 2009, ISS Ireland Limited (the Company) acquired the Guarding Division of Chubb, and approximately 600 employees, including the worker concerned, transferred across to the Company bringing existing terms and conditions of employment.
The worker is employed as a full-time security officer in the Covidien Tullamore site. In February, 2010, following meetings between the parties it was agreed to introduce a rostering system with effect from May, 2010. Prior to the changes the claimant had worked 4 nights per week of 12 hours duration giving him a total of 48 hours per week. He was paid 39 hours at ordinary rate and 9 hours at time plus one half. He was the only one of 4 officers with this arrangement. Following the introduction of the changes in May, 2010, the 4 officers worked a roster of 44/36 hours every second week giving an average of 40 hours per week, i.e. 39 hours ordinary pay and 1 hour at time plus one half. The worker's case refers to the amount of overtime he has lost and claims that a further 2 hours per week will be taken from him.
The worker referred his case to a Rights Commissioner whose recommendation was as follows:
"I notice that the claimant's overtime earnings have been reduced as a result of the changes introduced. However, the Company have demonstrated that they had very little other options if they were to cut costs and ultimately retain jobs which is the common good referred to in their submission.
I cannot that he claimant be treated any differently than the other employees who had to accept the new rostering arrangements as to do so would only give rise to significant repercussive claims.
I do not uphold the claimant's complaint"
The worker appealed the 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 28th July, 2011.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The claimant had worked 9 hours overtime per week for almost 5 years and had become used to a certain level of income. The sudden loss of the ovetime in one go has meant a serious drop in his wages which he feels is unfair. The Company now proposes reducing his working week by a further 2 hours. The worker was not a member of the Union which made the agreement with the Company.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company implmented an agreed rostering system in line with security industry norms in Ireland, amongst other necessary cost savings.
2. The worker concerned was just one of many employees affected; some employees had even greater losses than the worker. Of the 600 hundred employees he is just one of two who has lodged a complaint/claim. Conceding the claim would be grossly unfair to other employees and would lead to numerous knock-on claims.
DECISION:
Having carefully considered the submissions of both parties in this case the Court upholds the Rights Commissioner's recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
10th August, 2011______________________
CONDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.