Labour Court Database
__________________________________________________________________________________
File Number: CD87912
Case Number: LCR11575
Section / Act: S67
Parties: C.B. PACKAGING LTD - and - ITGWU
|
Subject:
Dismissal of two Production Supervisors.
Recommendation:
3. The Court has carefully considered the submissions in this
case. Taking account of the fact that such a high proportion of
faulty material was allowed through the system, it is the view of
the Court that there was a failure of the workers concerned to
exercise their duty to supervise the work place which can only be
attributed to negligence, even if no account is taken of their key
role in the quality control process.
Furthermore this negligence occurred when the workers concerned
had been fully aware of the Company's vital interest in
maintaining quality standards and their own part in that process.
The Court therefore accepts that in this case the Company's
decision was warranted and does not recommend reinstatement of the
workers concerned.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87912 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11575
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: C.B. PACKAGING LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
(DUBLIN NO. 2 BRANCH)
SUBJECT:
1. Dismissal of two Production Supervisors.
BACKGROUND:
2. With reference to the Court's investigation of 1st December,
1987 into the above dispute the following is the Recommendation of
the Court:-
RECOMMENDATION:
3. The Court has carefully considered the submissions in this
case. Taking account of the fact that such a high proportion of
faulty material was allowed through the system, it is the view of
the Court that there was a failure of the workers concerned to
exercise their duty to supervise the work place which can only be
attributed to negligence, even if no account is taken of their key
role in the quality control process.
Furthermore this negligence occurred when the workers concerned
had been fully aware of the Company's vital interest in
maintaining quality standards and their own part in that process.
The Court therefore accepts that in this case the Company's
decision was warranted and does not recommend reinstatement of the
workers concerned.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
___________________
10th December, 1987. Deputy Chairman
U.M./J.C.