INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
NATIONAL BUS & RAIL UNION
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Keogh
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Retrospective payment of non-availability of ticket machines (Crouzet).
2. The Unions have submitted a claim on behalf of ten travelling ticket collectors for the non-use of portable Crouzet ticket machines.
Following Labour Court Recommendation No. LCR14417 in April, 1994, the Company introduced the ticket machines nationwide with the exception of Tralee, Mallow and Galway. In August, 2000, the ticket machines were brought into operation in these areas. The ticket collectors received an allowance for operating these machines. The Unions are now seeking the retrospective payment of this allowance for the areas as mentioned above.
Management rejected the Unions' claim. It states that in October, 2001, the "New Deal" agreement provided for new agreed salary structures which consolidated a number of allowances into revised salary scales including the Crouzet allowance.
As no agreement was possible between the parties, the dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held on the 5th of February, 2002, but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 11th of February, 2002, under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Labour Court investigated the dispute on the 30th of April, 2002.
3. 1. The staff concerned were denied this allowance because of the non-availability of the new ticket machines.
2. The Company should pay the allowance to these workers and make the payment retrospective for the time the machines should have been in operation.
3. It was part of the 1994 agreement that staff who did not have the opportunity to operate the new ticket machines be paid the allowance.
4. 1. A higher duty allowance is only paid when the required function is carried out by the employee(s) concerned.
2. Because staff failed to agree to operate the new ticketing machines, this gave rise to the allocation of the machines to other locations.
3. Existing agreements provide for the use of the equipment, which is now available at the locations affected and provided for as part of the now agreed payment mechanisms.
4. The Court is asked to accept that the Company have acted in a reasonable manner and to recommend full cooperation with the required use of the portable Crouzet ticket machines.
Having regard to all the circumstances of this case, the Court does not recommend concession of the Unions' claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
3rd May, 2002______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.