FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : RADIO TELEF�S ÉIREANN TRADING AS RTÉ (REPRESENTED BY MC DOWELL PURCELL SOLICITORS) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-127204-ir-12/EOS.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker was employed by RTÉ on a fixed-term contract as Tutti Violin II in the National Symphony Orchestra. Her position terminated on 6th May 2012, 22 months after her two year contract began. The Claimant was given assurances in writing that another contract of three years duration would, subject to certain conditions, be offered to her. She is seeking either a contract of indefinite duration or compensation for the early termination of her employment. Management reject her claims in total.
The issue involves a claim by a Worker. The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 11th July 2013, the Rights Commissioner issued her Recommendation as follows:-
"Accordingly, in light of the unique circumstances pertaining in this dispute, I am recommending that the Claimant be given first option on any available temporary work for tutti violinists for a period of 1 year from the date of this recommendation and that she be paid €7,500 compensation for the financial distress and hardship arising from the unanticipated termination of her employment.
This is in full and final settlement of this dispute and should not be invoked or relied upon in any other forum".
On the 24th September, 2013 the Union appealed the Rights Commissioners 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 3rd April 2014.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The Worker took the position with RTE based on verbal assurances that gave her the impression that the temporary status of her contract was a formality.
She was reassured until shortly before her termination that her contract would be extended.
2. Her life and professional career have been subjected to upheaval and she has suffered significant financial loss due to the unexpected action of her Employer.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The individual decision in this case should be seen in the context of organisation wide pay cuts, reduction in headcount through retirements, career breaks, voluntary redundancies and non-renewal of fixed-term contracts.
2. This is not a redundancy, compulsory or otherwise but rather the expiry of a fixed-term work contract which occurs approximately a hundred times per year within the organisation.
DECISION:
Having carefully considered the submissions of both parties to this dispute the Court finds that there is merit in the Union’s claim and upholds the Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation in this regard.
However, the Court finds that the compensation awarded by the Rights Commissioner in this case is not proportionate to the injury suffered and decides that it should be increased to €13,500 in full and final settlement of this case.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
22nd July, 2014______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.