INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
TRANSPORT SALARIED STAFFS' ASSOCIATION
Chairman: Mr McGee
Employer Member: Mr Carberry
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
1. Compensation for disturbance/co-operation with re-location
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between Iarnr�d Eireann and the Unions in regard to the movement of 210 staff from North Wall and Tara Street to a new premises located in Inchicore.The Union on behalf of its members is claiming disturbance payment on the basis that the move will have an enormous effect on their working conditions. The Company rejects the claim on the basis that the new location is within five miles of the current worksite and therefore does not merit disturbance payments.
- 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 30th June, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 15th September, 2004, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
3. 1. The Union contends that members lifestyles and work-life balance is greatly disturbed by the movement from North Wall to Inchicore
2. The sale of North Wall will generate huge revenue for the Company and the claim for approx €2,500 that is presented is small in relation to the amount of money involved in the sale.
3. Staff in the North Wall location had expectations that they would be based there for all their working lives and the North Wall area as a transport hub would make accessibility easier.
4. The location in Inchicore is imposing pressures and demands on the members and they should be compensated accordingly.
4. 1. No agreement exists to pay compensation for relocation within a single urbanisation.
2. The Company has already outlaid a considerable sum in satisfying the concerns of those involved in the move.
3. Disturbance claims of this nature have been outlawed since 1984 by the then Department of Public Service and have not been paid by Iarnr�d Eireann since then. When this work was originally relocated from Pearse Station to North Wall, no disturbance was paid.
4. The accommodation in Inchicore is far superior to that currently being occupied.
Having considered the submissions made by the parties, the Court finds that in this particular case, a level of inconvenience to staff has been established.
The Court recommends that, on completion of the move to Inchicore, the Company should make a payment to each of the claimants of €600 and that a further payment of €300 be made to each claimant still in employment on 1st September, 2005, in full and final settlement of the claim brought before the Court. The claimants should fully co-operate with the Company in the process of moving files, equipment and personal effects.
The Court also notes the Company's commitment made to contract staff under the terms of the Protection of Employees (Fixed Term Work) Act, 2003.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
30th September, 2004______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Joanne O'Connor, Court Secretary.