INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Carberry
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Phase out of bus service.
2. The Company is involved in the manufacture and assembly of access equipment, employing 122 people at its site in Parkwest Industrial Park, Dublin 12. The Company relocated on a phased basis from Pottery Road, Dun Laoghaire to Parkwest Industrial Park between August and November, 2001. As part of an agreement reached under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission, between the Company and TEEU/Mandate members, the Company made available three buses from various locations to accommodate transportation of employees in order to assist staff make alternative travel arrangements. Provision of the service was to be reviewed after six months.
The issue in dispute is the retention of the bus service, with the Company subsidising payment.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference took place. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 26th of April, 2002, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 14th of June, 2002.
3. 1.The Union believed that after the six month period that they would be in a position to legitimately negotiate a continuation of the bus service.
2. Members would be prepared to meet 50% of the cost.
3. Some members have no means of transport from Dun Laoghaire to Parkwest.
4. 1. The bus service was provided for a six month period under the Agreement.
2. Only members directly affected were balloted.
3. Provision of a free bus service indefinitely for a small minority of members is unsustainable, from both an internal equity perspective and from the Company’s own financial perspective.
4. The Company had undertaken to bear administration costs during the phasing out of the bus service with workers who had reached their six month anniversary contributing €5 per day and to negotiate the best deal possible with the bus company. This was rejected by shop stewards.
5. The three month phasing out period has been overtaken by the Company committing to continue the bus service up to the date of the hearing. However, the bus service should terminate as soon as possible in accordance with the terms of the original Agreement.
6. The proposal has already been voted on, and accepted, by Mandate.
Having regard to the terms of the agreement reached in December, 2000, the final proposal put forward by the Company on the phasing out of the bus service is reasonable and should be accepted.
The Court notes that the Company is prepared to facilitate the continuance of the service with the cost borne by those using it. The Court recommends that this option be explored further.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
8th July, 2002______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Caroline Hayes, Court Secretary.