FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : CARLOW COUNTY COUNCIL (REPRESENTED BY LGMSB) - AND - SIX NAMED WORKERS (REPRESENTED BY IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Alteration of term-time agreement without consultation.
BACKGROUND:
2. The issue at the centre of this dispute is whether Carlow County Council acted within the terms of the nationally agreed terms of the Term Time Scheme by requiring staff availing of the scheme to take their annual leave immediately before or after their term time leave.
On the 27th March, 2009 the Union referred the issue to the Labour Court, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 8th September, 2009 in Carlow Court House.
The Union agreed to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. This is a serious concern for the Claimants as their annual leave entitlements are already reduced due to Term Time and the requirement to take two weeks of their annual leave at the same time would leave them little discretion to apply for leave at another time during the year.
2. The Council by its unilateral decision to alter the terms of the scheme has breached the standard for industrial relations by not consulting with the Union. It is also in breach of Section 28.13 of Towards 2016.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Management in an effort to maximise the numbers taking term time whilst also ensuring optimum service delivery decided to require staff intending to avail of term time leave to also take their annual leave immediately prior or following their term time leave.
2. The Claimants were notified in February some months before term time was to commence and the Claimants confirmed their acceptance, following advice from their Union some attempted to withdraw their agreement.
3. Section 21(1) of the Organisation of Working Time Act vests the discretion with the Employer as to when an Employee will take his or her annual leave. The Council submits that it has fully complied with all its legal requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
It appears to the Court that the language used at Clause 8 of the Agreement on the objectives and scope of the Term Time Scheme was intended to provide that applications for annual leave to be taken in conjunction with term time leave would not normally be granted. In the Court's view this clause could not be relied upon as authorising a Local Authority to require participating staff to take annual leave in conjunction with such leave.
The Court is further satisfied that the local management did not consult with the affected staff or their Trade Union before deciding to require them to take the annual leave in issue. In these circumstances, Management cannot rely on the provisions of Section 20(1) of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 as entitling the Council to act as it did.
Having regard to all the circumstances of the case the Court recommends that in future any similar proposal should be fully discussed between the Council and the Union before implementation. With regard to the Union's claim, the Court is satisfied that there was an element of unfairness in the manner in which the Council required staff to take two weeks annual leave in conjunction with term time leave.
The Court further recommends that those affected should be afforded an additional two days annual leave in the current leave year in full and final settlement of this dispute.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
22nd September, 2009______________________
JFChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.