FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : WEXFORD COUNTY COUNCIL - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation R-148929-IR-14/MMG
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns the Worker's appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation R-148929-IR-14/MMG. It is the Worker's claim that he has been treated unfairly by his Employer as a result of the Employer's refusal to afford him time off in-lieu of a fifteen minute morning break which, the Worker claims, he has been unable to avail of whilst working alone one day per week. The Employer rejects the Worker's claim and agreement could not be reached. The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 21st April, 2015 the Rights Commissioner issued his recommendation as follows:
"It is my recommendation that this matter not be deemed a valid complaint and as such the working arrangement as unfolding in the centre should be recognised as normal.
The claimant's case must therefore fail".
On the 7th May, 2015 the Worker appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 30th September, 2015.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Worker is not in a position to avail of a morning break when working alone on one day per week.
2. The Worker is seeking compensatory time off in-lieu equivalent to the duration of the morning breaks he has been unable to avail of.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Employer maintains that it is fully compliant with the terms of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 and the Worker is in a position to take the break time afforded to him in accordance with the Act.
2. The Employer contends that there are several employees who are required to operate solely and who are in a position to take their breaks.
DECISION:
The Union appealed the Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner under the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 – 2001 which recommended that the claimant’s case should fail. The Court has considered the submissions of the parties and the points made at the hearing.
The parties have confirmed to the Court that an agreement was made in 2012 addressing a range of matters including the taking of a break when the site is being operated by one person.
The Court cannot find a basis to recommend in favour of the appeal but recommends that the parties should engage jointly to satisfy themselves as to the effective operation of clause 4 of the 2012 agreement on the New Ross site.
The Court varies the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner accordingly.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
21st October 2015______________________
SCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.