INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
Chairman: Mr Flood
Employer Member: Mr Pierce
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Appointment of Chief Projectionist.
2. The dispute concerns the appointment of a chief projectionist at the Screen Cinema. There are currently 2 projectionists working at the Cinema. The Union wants the longest serving person promoted to chief projectionist, and claims that the Company is in breach of a manning agreement.
The worker concerned started working for the Cinema in November, 1992, covering for a projectionist who was absent on long term illness. He was offered a permanent position in September, 1993, and took up the position as 2nd operator in February, 1994. In July, 1994, the chief projectionist left to work in the Ambassador Cinema and was replaced by another projectionist. The Union argues that, in effect, the worker concerned has been carrying out the duties of chief projectionist since July, 1994. The Company's view is that the position of chief projectionist was not replaced, and that there is no need to do so.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and conciliation conferences took place on the 16th of January and the 5th of June, 1997. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 7th of October, 1997, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 12th of December, 1997.
3. 1. Since 1977, there has been an agreement that the manning level at the Screen Cinema would be a chief projectionist and a second operator. The position continued until July 1994, when the chief projectionist left. Since then, the worker concerned has been carrying out the duties of the chief projectionist. The second operator has stated that he would be happy to let the worker concerned take on the position of chief projectionist. The worker carries out all the duties of chief projectionist, including maintaining the projection area, changing of clocks and filling out of time sheets. The Company asked the worker to come to work at the Screen Cinema, and there has been no indication of dissatisfaction with his work.
4. 1. There is no need for the appointment of a chief projectionist. The responsibilities have been carried out equally by the 2 operators since 1994. The Company must have the right to appoint people as necessary and cannot be dictated to by the Union (this is covered in clause 20 of the Company/Union agreement). The worker concerned does not carry out all the duties of a chief projectionist. The main responsibilities are with head office. The Company did offer to give the worker a 6 month trial period to assess his suitability as chief projectionist but the offer was rejected by the Union.
The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions presented, recommends that the original Company offer of a six months probationary period as Senior Projectionist for the claimant be accepted by the Union.
The Court further recommends that, subject to a satisfactory probationary performance, he be appointed to the position.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
23rd December, 1997______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.