FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : G4S CASH SOLUTIONS IRELAND LTD - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Appeal of Recommendation of a Rights Commissioner Ir95509/10/MR
BACKGROUND:
2. The issue before the Court concerns an appeal of a Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. IR95509/10/MR by the Union on behalf of its members. The Company operates in the cash collection and delivery business. In February 2010 the Company's cash-in-Transit Depot in Limerick was extended and included a larger canteen for workers. As part of this a CCTV camera was placed in the canteen. It is the Union's position that there should have been consultations between the parties before the camera was put in place. There is no camera operating in the canteen of any other Depot. The Company's position is that there is a necessity for comprehensive camera coverage through the entire Depot. The Limerick Depot is the most recent to be refurbished and cameras will be positioned in all other depots when additional investment is available. The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On 31st May, 2011 the Rights Commissioner made the following Recommendation:
"Accordingly, I now recommend that G4S Cash Solutions Ireland Ltd should recommit itself to engaging in proper advance consultation on all issues such as this in the future. In addition, the Company should agree to make a contribution of €1,000 to a charity of the Union's choice."
On the 5th July, 2011 the Union 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 18th November, 2011.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The Company unilaterally proceeded to install CCTV cameras in the Limerick Depot. On 3 occasions the Union sought a meeting on the matter without any response from the employer.
2 There are no other CCTV cameras currently operating in the canteen of any other Depot.
3 The Workers concerned are extremely security conscious. It is the Unions understanding that there is no camera in areas such as the local managers office and the administrative area yet there is one in the recreational area of the canteen.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 The Limerick Depot is the most recent to be refurbished. The standard of branch design is constantly revised to ensure adequate response to any criminal threat. The requirement to improve camera coverage in all areas has been identified in this respect.
2 The camera images from the canteen are not for live viewing and are only called on if needed.
3 The installation of a camera in the canteen provides necessary protection for both the Company and Workers.
DECISION:
The matter before the Court concerns the Union’s appeal of a Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation concerning the installation of CCTV Cameras in the Company’s canteen in its Limerick branch.
The Union raised objection to the introduction of CCTV in the canteen as management had unilaterally introduced the equipment and commenced using it without entering into any form of consultation with either employees or their representatives.
The Company stated that it had three meetings with the National Negotiating Committee where the issue of the use of CCTV was discussed. It stated that the use of CCTV cameras was an essential element in the protection system and was necessary for its business. It introduced the CCTV cameras in the Limerick branch when the branch was totally refurbished in 2010 and it plans to extend it to all other branches in the near future. It contended that its use of CCTV in the canteen area was in compliance with the Data Protection Acts and that it was operated with due care and consideration for staff.
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court recommends that the Company should establish a policy on the use of CCTV in staff areas in the Company and, in the meantime, the CCTV system in the canteen should continue to operate. When establishing such a policy the Court recommends that the Union should be consulted to consider its views and opinions on the matter.
The policy should be comprehensive and in any event should at least endeavour to cover the following areas:
�The security industry’s requirements for the use of CCTV in staff areas.
�The reasons for using CCTV in staff areas and any limitations on its use.
�Provide assurance that the use of CCTV in staff areas will adhere to principles of fairness and outline details of safeguards on its use.
�Provide details on the status of personnel with appropriate training and responsibility for its day-to-day operation.
�Any other relevant matters.
The Court recommends that the policy should be put in place by no later than 31st January 2012.
The Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation is varied accordingly.
The Court so Decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
8th December, 2011______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.