FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : IRISH RAIL - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION TRANSPORT SALARIED STAFFS' ASSOCIATION UNITE THE UNION NATIONAL BUS AND RAIL UNION TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Chairmanship of Disciplinary Appeals Tribunal.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the Chairmanship of the Disciplinary Appeals Tribunal. This dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 27th July, 2015 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 23rd September, 2015.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Unions object strongly to the removal of the Chairman of the Disciplinary Appeals Tribunal without their prior knowledge or consent.
2. It has always been the case that the appointing of the Chairman for the Disciplinary Appeals Tribunal was a joint venture and has been mutually agreed by the Trade Unions and the Employer.
3. The Unions are seeking to maintain the agreement and selection process agreed between the Unions and the Employer and not to go down the road of tendering in selecting the next Chairman.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Employer says that it is the view of the Trade Unions that they acted unilaterally in removing the most recent Chairman of the Disciplinary Appeals Tribunal but the Employer says that it acted with just cause.
2. The Employer says that despite severeal attempts it has proved impossible to move on from the issue and to restart the operation of the Tribunal. The Employer has offered the option of an interim Chairman but the Unions were not agreeable.
3.The Employer arguesthat it is necessary to tender for this role now to ensure that there is a transparent process and that it complies with the CIE policy on procurement.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns the Chairmanship of the Company's
Disciplinary Appeals Tribunal. The Tribunal was set up as part of an
Agreement between the Company and the Trade Unions in March 1994. It
was agreed that the Tribunal would consist of a Trade Union nominee, a
Company nominee and an agreed independent Chairman.
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court is of the view
that the Company acted contrary to the terms of the 1994 Agreement when
it took unilateral action to remove the Chairman of the Tribunal in
November 2014 without consultation with the Trade Unions.
The Court recommends that the parties should meet to mutually agree a
new independent Chairman of the Tribunal. In the event that there are
difficulties in doing so then the Court is prepared to assist the parties in the
process if required.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
1st October, 2015______________________
CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.