FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : DUBLIN BUS - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION NATIONAL BUS AND RAIL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Seniority For De-Safer Grade.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 30 August 2017 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 28 September 2017.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The NBRU’s position is that seniority should be established based on how long a staff member has been an employee of the Company.
2. SIPTU’s position is that seniority should be established in line with how it is applied in other grades within the Company based on how long a staff member has been in the grade..
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Employer submits that in normal circumstances seniority is determined by length of service in a particular grade.
2. Vacancies in the grade are filled internally and not by competition.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has given very careful consideration to the written submissions of the parties. The Court also takes particular account of the longstanding agreed arrangements existing across the company wherever seniority applies.
The Court is aware of the particular circumstances which give rise to a person’s assignment as a de-safer. The Court observes that those circumstances result in a lack of clarity as regards the issue of whether the position is a grade or a role. Notwithstanding this lack of clarity, the Court accepts that assignment as a de-safer is an assignment to a particular and specific function in the company. The assignment therefore is to a position which comprises many of the characteristics of what elsewhere in the company is designated as a grade.
The Court is unable to identify compelling reasons as to why a new, and what would be within the company an atypical seniority arrangement, should be created in a situation where such arrangements as are in place across the company represent the consensus as regards such arrangements.
In all of the circumstances the Court recommends that the arrangements to apply in the de-safer grade / role should be based on seniority in the grade / role and not service in the company.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
LS______________________
29 September 2017Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Louise Shally, Court Secretary.