INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Flood
Employer Member: Mr Carberry
Worker Member: Mr. Somers
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation IR14645/03/TB
2. The claim concerns 9 workers who are graded at Station 0perative No. 2 (SO2). The workers believe that because of their duties and responsibilities they should be graded at Station Operative No. 1 (SO1). This would mean a pay increase from €745.92 to €793.28 for a 48-hour contract per week. The Union supplied a detailed list of duties involved to the Court. The Company's case is that the claim for regrading has already been declined internally.
The dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner and his recommendation was as follows:
"Based on the evidence submitted, I do not recommend in favour of the Union's claim".
The Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on the 21st of November, 2003, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 13th of February, 2004.
3. 1. The workers concerned have duties and responsibilities that are at least equal to those of SO1s in other stations around the country. As such, they should be upgraded.
2. The claim has been ongoing for a considerable amount of time. There should be an internal mechanism to deal with this type of claim.
4. 1. Whilst the Company recognises the valuable work being done by the workers concerned, it is no more demanding than work being carried out by SO2s throughout the Inter City and suburban networks (details supplied to the Court).
2. There has been no change in the duties of the workers that would warrant an upgrading. If the claim were conceded, there would inevitably be repercussive claims from other SO2s.
The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties, is not satisfied that the claimants have shown that there has been a change in their duties that would warrant upgrading.
However, the Court, based on the discussions during the hearing, is of the view that both parties could benefit from discussion on a possible alternative system of evaluation.
The Court upholds the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation and rejects the appeal.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
26th February, 2004______________________
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.