INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
ROSCOMMON COUNTY COUNCIL
- AND -
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
Chairman: Ms Jenkinson
Employer Member: Mr Grier
Worker Member: Mr. Somers
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation IR15902/03/TB.
2. The appeal concerns a worker who is employed as an Assistant Storekeeper. Since 1993 he has been remunerated at the maximum of the General Services Supervisors rate of pay. In 2002 the Council and the Union negotiated an agreement to pay an on-call allowance of €100 per week to the General Services Supervisors with effect from 1st January, 2002. The Union claimed that the on-call allowance should be paid to the claimant. The Council rejected the claim. The dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 15th April, 2004 the Rights Commissioner issued his recommendation as follows:
"The claimant should be paid the call out allowance from 1st January, 2003."
On the 22nd April, 2004 the Council appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court. The Court heard the appeal in Roscommon on the 28th September, 2004.
3. 1. The claimant's post is an Assistant Storekeeper. The agreement which provided for an allowance of €100 p.w. stipulated that it was applicable to General Services Supervisors only.
2. As the claimant is not an appointed General Services Supervisor the Council is not in a position to consider his claim.
4. 1. The claimant is a General Services Supervisor with Roscommon County Council albeit that he is employed in the Stores with that Council.
2. The claimant is entitled to the allowance. He receives the same rate of pay as a General Services Supervisor. Likewise he is paid travelling expenses and he has to respond to call outs like other General Services Supervisors.
Having considered the submissions of both parties, the Court accepts that the agreement reached to pay on call payments to General Services Supervisors, does not cover the Assistant Storekeeper, the worker involved in this claim.
The County Council accepts that the Assistant Storekeeper is required on occasions to be called out, however it also provided information to the Court on the frequency of such call outs. These figures indicate that the frequency of such call outs does not compare with the number of call outs for the General Services Supervisors, although the information indicates that not all call outs were logged.
Therefore, the Court decides that in recognition of his cooperation with these requests, the Assistant Storekeeper should be paid a rate of €30.00 per week.
The Rights Commissioner's recommendation is varied accordingly.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
30th December, 2004______________________
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.