FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : SOLAS - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Decision r-140901-ir-13/JT.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the Worker's request for a transfer to his previous place of employment.This dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 2nd February, 2015 the Rights Commissioner issued the following Recommendation:-
- "I have no jurisdiction in this matter."
On the 23rd March, 2015 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 6th May, 2015.
3. 1. The Worker had a legitimate expectation that he would be relocated back to his previous place of employment.
2.The Employer failed to deal with this matter in a timely and transparent manner.
3.The Worker suffered considerable distress and should be compensated accordingly.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.The Worker applied for and was granted a transfer.
2.The Worker's position subsequently transferred to another Employer.
3.The Worker should raise his grievance with his actual Employer.
DECISION:
Having given careful consideration to the extensive written, oral and supplementary submissions of both parties to this dispute, the Court finds that the Claimant, while employed in the Loughlinstown Training Centre, voluntarily applied for and was appointed to a position in the Ballyfermot Training Centre. The Claimant wished to transfer back to Loughlinstown but Management was not in a position to accommodate his request at that time. Events overtook matters and the two Training Centres were separately integrated into different public service bodies and ceased to be part of a national organisation. The Claimant now seeks to transfer between public service bodies rather than within a public service body.
In the circumstances the Court does not recommend concession of the Union’s claim as it cannot set aside a Government decision to accommodate the desires as opposed to the rights of an individual affected by the organisational restructuring involved.
The Court notes, however, that the Public Service Agreement 2010 -2014 as amended makes provision, in limited circumstances, for inter- agency staff transfers. The Claimant’s dispute may be addressed in that context.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
26th July, 2015______________________
JMcCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.