INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL
- AND -
Chairman: Ms Jenkinson
Employer Member: Mr Doherty
Worker Member: Mr. Somers
1. On-call payments.
2. Dublin City Council operates an emergency on-call system throughout its depots. Plumbers who are members of AMICUS provide this service in Housing Maintenance.
The dispute before the Court concerns the refusal of the Council to pay the on-call allowance of £25 (€31.74) to plumbers who have provided this service on an on-going basis for many years.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 15th of April, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 4th of June, 2004.
3. 1.The plumbers involved in this service have provided an emergency on-call service on a regular weekly basis at the behest of their employer.
2. The Council has withheld the on-call allowance while acknowledging that the service was being provided.
3. The workers concerned are at a loss of approximately €4,000 each, based on an average 45 weeks per year on call since December, 1999.
4. 1. In November, 2002, the Council introduced a rostered on-call service with the payment of an on-call allowance.
2. The workers concerned are seeking the on-call allowance from the period Spring, 2000 to November, 2002, a period when there was no rostered on-call arrangement.
3. The Council maintains that it has acted fairly and with equity to all the workers in this case and that the backdating of this claim is not warranted.
The Union sought retrospective payment of an on-call allowance, which took effect from November 2002, back to November 1999. The Council hold the position that no formal rostering arrangements applied prior to November 2002 and therefore are of the view that retrospection is not warranted.
However, in an effort to settle this dispute, the Council was prepared to offer a payment of €1,000 to each of the seven claimants involved. Having considered the submissions of both sides, the Court recommends that this payment should be increased to €1,500 in full and final settlement of all claims relating to the retrospection of the on-call payment.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
21st June, 2004______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.