DWT2436

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00002285 (CA-00003039-010)

BACKGROUND:

The Worker appealed the Adjudication Officer's Decision to the Labour Court on the 5 October 2018. A Labour Court Hearing took place on the 6 November 2024.

The following is the Labour Court's Decision:

DECISION:

Background to the Appeal

This is an appeal by Mr Robert Pirsch (‘the Complainant’) from a decision of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-0002285/CA-0003039-010, dated 4 September 2018) under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 (‘the Act’). Notice of Appeal was received in the Court on 5 October 2018. The Court heard the within appeal, along with seven related appeals on several dates over the course of 2024 with the final hearing date occurring on 6 November 2024. The related appeals bear the following reference numbers: WTC/24/61; PW/18/60; TE/18/54;TE/24/62; TE/24/63; TE/24/64 and TE/24/65.

The Complainant gave sworn evidence to the Court as did two witnesses called on behalf of Ryanair Designated Activity Company (‘the Respondent’). Only the evidence relevant to the within appeal is recited in this decision.

The Factual Background

The Complainant was employed by the Respondent as a Ground Handling Agent with effect from 8 November 2008 and was based at Dublin Airport. He signed a contract of employment on 6 November 2008 and that contract was countersigned on behalf of the Respondent on 12 November 2008. The Complainant’s salary was €2,945.51 gross per month. He worked a three-shift pattern and was notified of his shifts by means of a roster that was posted in the staff break room some two weeks in advance.

The Complaint

The Complainant submits that he did not receive adequate breaks during the working day, in breach of section 12 of the Act. He did not identify any specific dates on which this allegedly occurred but told the Court that there was frequently a shortage of staff available on particular shifts to service the aircraft arriving and departing and, as a consequence, he could be moved between teams. He told the Court that he sometimes had to service up to three flights within a timeframe of twenty minutes.

The Respondent’s Submission and Evidence

Mr Ray Keegan, Assistant Ramp Co-Ordinator at Dublin Airport, gave extremely detailed evidence in relation to the staffing arrangements for the baggage handlers’ shifts. He denied that staff shortages occurred on a regular basis. He said that if a shortage did occur on a particular shift, the teams rostered on that shift were reorganised to ensure an equal distribution of work. The witness gave very detailed evidence by reference to a sample monthly roster (which included the Complainant) of the multiple opportunities that the Complainant had on the dates in question to avail himself of several breaks during his shift. The Complainant, he said, had ample time during many of those breaks to return to the break room and have a meal, for example.

Discussion and Decision

The Court fully accepts the accuracy of the detailed evidence given by Mr Keegan by reference to sample monthly roster which included the Complainant.  The Court also accepts that in the aviation industry flights are occasionally delayed with the consequence that the actual work pattern of ground staff, including baggage handlers, sometimes varies from what was flagged in their roster for such days. This reality does not, however, ground the Complainant’s allegation that he was regularly unable to avail himself of rest and meal breaks during the working day.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal fails.

The Court so decides.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Alan Haugh
ÁM	______________________
29th November 2024	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Áine Maunsell, Court Secretary.