Up Arrow
 
 
Question Icon
 

Select an option from the dropdown list and press GO

 
Question Icon
 

Select an option from the dropdown list and then press GO

 
 
 

2002

Information Icon Water Mark
Up Arrow

Add to Binder allows you to add Workplace Relations content to your personal binder for viewing or printing later.

Binder icon image Binder

To access your binder, click the Binder link at the top of the page.

 
 

LCR17234

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/02/246
RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR17234
(CC02/4074)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990



PARTIES :
AER LINGUS

- AND -

SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION


DIVISION :

Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Keogh
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
SUBJECT:
1. Withdrawal of a lunch allowance.


BACKGROUND:

2. The Union claims that management has withdrawn a lunch allowance from 3 clerical staff employed in the Travel Shop Section without any consultation or agreement with the Union. It wants the allowance restored. The current value of the allowance is €4.19 per day.

Management rejected the Union's claim and stated that the lunch allowance was withdrawn following the implementation of the "Aer Lingus Survival Plan".

As no agreement was possible between the parties the dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held on the 17th April, 2002 but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on


the 30th April, 2002 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on the 16th August, 2002(earliest date suitable to the parties).


UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1 The Union cannot accept any further erosion of its members terms and conditions of employment.

2. The lunch allowance was unilaterally withdrawn by management without any agreement or consultation with the Union.

3. The withdrawal of the lunch allowance for the staff concerned was not in any way part of the Company's "Survival Plan" for this section.

4. The Company has not only breached accepted industrial relations norms and procedures, including agreements on change, but have also breached the terms of the Labour Relations Commission's "Survival Plan".



COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The lunch allowance was withdrawn for the staff concerned following the implementation of the Company's " Survival Plan".

2. Most of the staff at Dublin Airport do not use the staff canteen and given the current difficulties facing the Company it is no longer practical to continue paying this allowance.

3. The staff concerned were given the opportunity to redeploy to the new services centre and were informed that the lunch allowance would no longer apply.
  • 4. The Company made an offer to buyout the lunch allowance. However, this was rejected by the Union.





RECOMMENDATION:

Having regard to all the circumstances of this case the Court recommends that the parties agree to the discontinuance of the lunch allowance, and that each of the staff members concerned receive compensation equal to twice the annual value of the allowance.






Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Kevin Duffy
23rd August, 2002______________________
LW/LWDeputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.




 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Share this page

 
logo-sml
Links|About the Reform Programme|Accessibility|Privacy Policy|Disclaimer|Sitemap

Registered Address: Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation, O'Brien Road, Carlow