INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
TRALEE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Pierce
Worker Member: Mr. Somers
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation IR3657/01/MR.
2. The worker concerned has been employed as a caretaker since 1968, in the first instance by Tralee V.E.C. and since 1993 by the Institute of Technology, Tralee. In January, 1970, the V.E.C. ratified an increase of £1.00 (1.27 Euro) per week to be paid to the worker concerned for working extra hours. This increase was not implemented. The Union is seeking recompense for the worker concerned.
The Institute states that there is no record that this increase was ever sanctioned by the Department of Education. It argues that in 1974, an agreement was reached between the parties in relation to overtime payments and this arrangement dealt with the issue in dispute.
The dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation. His recommendation issued on the 8th of June, 2001, as follows:-
"I therefore recommend that both parties should agree that this dispute be resolved by the payment by the Institute to the worker of an ex-gratia lump sum of £500".
(The worker was named in the Rights Commissioner's recommendation).
The Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on the 9th of July, 2001 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Court heard the appeal on the 3rd of October, 2001.
3. 1. In 1970, an increase of £1.00 (1.27 Euro) per week was ratified but was never passed on the worker concerned.
2. The Union estimates that the £1.00 (1.27 Euro) per week would now be worth £21.00 (26.66 Euro) per week if it had maintained its value relative to the worker's rate of pay. This would be worth £1,092.00 (1386.55 Euro) per annum at current rates.
3. The worker concerned should be adequately remunerated.
4. 1. There is no record to show that the 1970 proposal was sanctioned by the Department of Education.
2. In accordance with the 1974 agreement on overtime payments, the worker concerned is currently receiving the twelve and a quarter hours per week paid overtime although he may not actually be required to work this amount of overtime.
3. The worker concerned has been treated very favourably in relation to his remuneration arrangements.
Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Court agrees with the conclusions and recommendation of the Rights Commissioner.
Accordingly, the appeal is disallowed and the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner is affirmed.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
6th November, 2001______________________
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.