FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : EGIS ROAD AND TUNNEL OPERATION LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - PIOTR SZKARADEK (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Haugh Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision Reference No: ADJ00000647.
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a claim that the Worker's hours of work were changed without agreement and notice. An Adjudication Officer hearing took place on 18 March 2016 and the following decision was issued 25 May 2016.
- Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1946 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of the Workplace Relations Act.
I recommend that the Complainant operates his contracted hours as per the contract that he signed in June 2013.
I recommend that the Respondent continues to apply reasonableness to the rostering of the Complainant so that he can meet some of his family responsibilities.
The Union on behalf of the Complainant appealed the Adjudication Officer's Decision to the Labour Court on 4 July 2016 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
DECISION:
The Worker is employed on a part-time basis and currently works 24 hours per week on two 12-hour shifts over 7 days. Between October 2009 and July 2013 he was employed on a full-time basis during which period he was rostered in accordance with a block system.
The Worker entered into a new contract of employment with his employer when he transferred from full-time to part-time working. Paragraph 5.1 and the Schedule to that written contract provide that the Employer may “vary the employee’s normal working hours or normal start and finishing times if the needs of the business require.” In short, the Worker has given a contractual commitment to be reasonably flexible in making himself available to the employer.
There are two aspects to the complaint presented to the Court by the Worker’s representative: (a) the Worker is no longer rostered to work according to a block system such that he does not have sufficient advance notice of when will be required to be available to his employer; and (b) he is not rostered to work for a proportionate number of shifts that attract a premium payment.
At the hearing of this matter, the Respondent Employer undertook to make all reasonable efforts give the Complainant advance written notice of his rostered shifts of at least one month and similarly to make reasonable efforts to ensure that he is henceforth rostered for a proportionate number of premium rate shifts vis-�-vis his full-time colleagues.
The Court recommends the immediate implementation of the undertakings given to it by the Respondent and as outlined above. This recommendation is not to be construed as in any way amending the Worker’s contract of employment (including the provision for flexibility contained therein) and does not prevent either party negotiating variations to the Worker’s published roster on a case by case basis as the need arises.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
25 August 2016______________________
MNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Michael Neville, Court Secretary.