FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : ALLIED LOGISTIC LTD (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-110047-ir-11/JT.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the Worker's alleged demotion from Chargehand to General Operative. This dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 23rd February, 2012 the Rights Commissioner issued the following Recommendation:-
- "I accept the Respondents have tried to resolve the issue but the Claimant has not shown any flexibility in his approach. The Respondents have had to restructure their business to survive. The Claimant should reconsider his position in light of proposals made by the Respondent. As things stand I do not find his complaint well-founded."
On the 30th March, 2012 the Worker 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 12th July, 2012.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company made a unilateral decision to demote the Worker from Chargehand to General Operative.
2.The Worker continues to carry out many of the Chargehand duties.
3.This demotion has caused the Worker significant financial loss.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.A significant downturn in its business forced the Companyinter aliato make 186 employees redundant.
2.The Company consulted with the employees affected in a fair and reasonable attempt to agree change.
3.The Company no longer requires the Worker to carry out the duties of Chargehand.
DECISION:
- Having carefully considered the submissions of the parties the Court has reached the conclusion that in the circumstances of this case the employer did not act unreasonably in reverting the Claimant to his original role as a General Operative.
The Court fully understands the Claimant’s disappointment at being displaced in what he regarded as a promotional position. However, in circumstances where the Company considered it necessary to reduce the number of Chargehands the only viable options were that the Claimant be made redundant or that he be redeployed into a position for which there was a continuing need. The Claimant, to his credit, did not wish to opt for redundancy and in these circumstances the Court cannot see any other practical alternative to the one chosen by the Company.
In these circumstances the Court can see no justifiable basis upon which it could allow this appeal. Accordingly the appeal is disallowed and the Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner is affirmed.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
13th July, 2012______________________
JMcCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.