INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
UNITE THE UNION
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Ms Doyle
Worker Member: Mr Shanahan
1. Conditions of Employment/Paid Parking.
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the Employer and the Unions in relation to the Employer's proposed introduction of an annual parking fee to be imposed on staff members who wish to avail of on-site parking facilities. The Unions, while recognising that there is a requirement for a parking management system, strongly object to the introduction of this fee. The Unions contend that this is a diminution of existing terms and conditions of employment and does not offer any benefit to staff in return. The Employer rejects the Union's position and agreement could not be reached.The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a number of Conciliation Conferences held under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. Following on from these discussions, a proposal was drafted and recommended for acceptance by both sides. The proposal was subsequently rejected by the Unions. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 12th June, 2015, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 7th August, 2015.
3. 1. The Unions maintain that access to the car parking facilities forms part of the terms and conditions of employment of its members.
2. The introduction of the fee does nothing to alleviate the issues associated with the current parking facilities.
3. The parking fee offers no benefit to staff and should not be introduced.
4. 1. The Employer asserts that the car parking facility is not a term and condition of employment.
2. The Employer contends that the proposed parking fee forms part of a larger parking demand management strategy.
3. The Employer asserts that the introduction of paid parking will assist in its efforts to address the current on-site parking issues.
In all the circumstances of this case, and having regard to the acceptance by all parties of the need for a parking demand management system, the Court cannot accept that the proposals agreed at the LRC are unreasonable. Accordingly the Court recommends that the proposals be accepted subject to the modification that follows:
The final paragraph of the IRO's proposal should be expanded to provide in the absence of agreement on all issues in local discussions, the College should develop and put forward for consultation, a comprehensive parking management and commuting policy which should form part of discussions at any resumed conciliation conference.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
19th August 2015______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.