This website contains decisions and determinations of both the Labour Court and the WRC. It also contains decisions and recommendations of the Equality Tribunal since 1996 and post 2007 determinations of the Employment Appeals Tribunal. For more information click here

  Return to Search

LCR22713

FULL RECOMMENDATION


CD/22/228
ADJ-00031232 CA-00040502
DECISION  NO.  LCR22713

SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969


PARTIES:
FINGAL COUNTY COUNCIL
(REPRESENTED BY ARTHUR COX SOLICITORS)

- AND -

A WORKER
(REPRESENTED BY AOC SOLICITORS)


DIVISION:

Chairman: Mr Foley
Employer Member: Mr Marie
Worker Member: Ms Tanham

SUBJECT:

1. Appeal Of Adjudication Officer Decision No. ADJ-00031232 CA-00040502

BACKGROUND:

2. The Worker appealed the Adjudication Officer’s Recommendation to the Labour Court on 25 November 2022 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.

On 19 October 2022 the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation:-

  • 1. The absolute right of a Local Government Employer to reassign staff and physically relocate
staff between Departments and Location is recognised subject to this right being exercised
in keeping with parallel and equally valued Policies and Staff movement Procedures (as
exhibited for example in the supporting paperwork) as negotiated with the respective Staff
Associations and Trade Unions.
  • 2. It is also recognised that in this case the relocation and reassignment of the Worker from his
Department of some 21 years was not a pleasant experience for the Worker who had a
natural expectation, in view of his impending retirement, of remaining in his long-standing
position.
  • 3. Two Irish language sean fhocail might usefully apply to the Council here - “nois fear a chur
ina lui na an modh direach” and that the position and reputation of the Worker is absolutely
unsullied. There is no “Uisce faoi talamh” in the entire process.
  • 4. The overtime issue to be the subject of an immediate claim processed via the recognised
Trade Union.
  • 5. The Trade Union concerned to note the Recommendation from the WRC that they
immediately process the claim to the HR Department.
  • 6. The assurances of a speedy Managerial response in this context, given at the Hearing by the
Staff Relations Manager/Senior Executive in HR to be noted.

A Labour Court hearing took place on 27 January 2023.





DECISION:

The Court has given very careful consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties. The matter before the Court is a trade dispute of long standing and has withstood the extensive efforts of the parties to find a resolution.

The Appellant has confirmed to the Court that the matter can, at this stage, be resolved by a resolution of matters related to outstanding claims for (a) loss of overtime, and (b) payment for overtime worked. In the event that these matters are resolved the Appellant’s intentions are such as to mean the Court need not address any dispute as regards a transfer across departments which occurred in 2020.

In these circumstances the Court has examined closely the dispute in relation to overtime matters.

It appears that, insofar as the Appellant has made a claim for loss of earnings arising from his transfer across Departments, both parties are agreed that the loss should be dealt with in accordance with the arrangements set out as part of the Haddington Road Agreement. In summary, those arrangements provide (a) for a comparison, in the manner set out in the arrangements, of overtime earned before implementation of a change with overtime earned following implementation of that change, (b) that any difference between those two figures is the quantum of loss arising from implementation of a change and (c) the quantum of loss so established is used to calculate compensation to be paid at the rate of 1.5 times the annual loss. The detailed formula for the before and after calculation periods and arrangements to calculate compensation based on a comparison of both are known to the parties.

For various reasons, the claim for compensation for loss suffered by the Appellant, which was set out approximately two years before the hearing of the Court, has not been paid. The Court notes that the Council has a relatively minor disagreement with the figure claimed by the Appellant to be the amount of overtime he earned in the period before implementation of the change but also notes that the Council was not in a position, notwithstanding the lapse of time, to provide the Court with its own calculation of that amount.

The Court in those circumstances recommends:


  • • That the Council (a)accept the calculation of the Appellant of overtime earned in the period prior implementation of change, (b) calculate the quantum of overtime earned in the reference period after implementation of the change, and (c) calculate the compensation to be paid to him according to the formula associated with the Haddington Road Agreement. The Court recommends that this compensation be calculated and paid to the Appellant no later than the end of February 2023.

    • That an outstanding claim for overtime worked in the amount of €500 approx., in respect of which the Appellant’s claim was, for stated reasons, mislaid or disposed of following submission by the Appellant, be paid immediately without further requirement for submission of claim by the Appellant.

    • That both parties accept that implementation of the terms of this Recommendation will represent full and final settlement of the dispute before the Court relating to and arising from the transfer across departments of the Appellant.


The Court so recommends.

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
OC ______________________
03 February 2023 Chairman


NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Orla Collender, Court Secretary.