FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : AN POST - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No. ADJ-00005472.
BACKGROUND:
2. This matter was referred to an Adjudication Officer for investigation and Recommendation. On the 2nd May 2017 the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation:-
- The decision following the appeal, to hold off on the dismissal and give the complainant a chance to prove himself is reasonable. The fact that the complainant was moved from Depot A to another Depot is reasonable in the circumstances.
I would advocate that this chapter now be put to bed and that the complainant look upon the decision to not dismiss giving him an opportunity to prove his value to his employer.
The Union on behalf of the Claimant appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on the 12 June 2017 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 19 July 2017.
DECISION:
This is an appeal by the Union on behalf of a worker against the Recommendation of an Adjudication Officer ADJ-00005472 into his claim regarding Management's decision to transfer him to another depot. The Adjudication Officer did not find in favour of the Claimant’s claim.
At the outset of the hearing, both parties confirmed for the Court that matters before the High Court which were referenced in the Union’s submission had no relevance to the case before the Court.
It was also clarified for the Court that the only issue on appeal from the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation was the Claimant’s compulsory transfer from Rathmines depot to the Whitehall depot.
The transfer came about following an appeal of a decision to dismiss the Claimant on 21stApril 2016 for reasons stated to the Court. On appeal Management decided under the circumstances to give the Claimant “one final chance” and assigned him to the Whitehall DSU with the proviso that his position would be reviewed over a six month period before making a final determination on his appeal. At the completion of that period, Management decided not to proceed with the dismissal and instead issued him with a final written warning to expire on 9thOctober 2018, with the condition that he must remain in the Whitehall DSU. Following which he will be free to apply for any vacant duties in other DSU’s in the normal way.
The Union submitted that the transfer was having a detrimental effect on the Claimant and in effect amounted to a demotion due to the loss of his seniority status in the new depot.
Management stated that the Claimant retained his terms and conditions of employment on transfer. It submitted that in the interest of fairness to the Claimant and to safeguard the Company’s interests, the decision to transfer him was reasonable in all the circumstances.
Having considered the oral and written submissions of both sides the Court is satisfied that Management’s action in transferring the Claimant to another depot was reasonable in all the circumstances. Accordingly the Court concurs with the Adjudication Officer’s findings and upholds his Recommendation.
Therefore the Union’s appeal fails.
The Court so Decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
LS______________________
21 July 2017Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Louise Shally, Court Secretary.