Argos (Represented by Irish Business and Employers' Confederation) v A Worker (Represented by Mandate Trade Union)

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 26 September 2019
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2019] 9 JIEC 2604
• Date: 26 September 2019
• Docket Number: FULL RECOMMENDATION DECISION NO.LCR22105 r-160848-ir-15/EH
• Court: Labour Court (Ireland)

Labour Court (Ire)

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/19/217

DECISION NO.LCR22105

r-160848-ir-15/EH

PARTIES:

Argos (Represented by Irish Business and Employers' Confederation)

and

A Worker (Represented by Mandate Trade Union)

DIVISION:

Chairman: Mr Haugh

Employer Member: Mr Marie

Worker Member: Ms Treacy

SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969

SUBJECT:

1 1. An appeal of a Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. r-160848-ir-15/EH.

BACKGROUND:

2 2. This case is an appeal of a Rights Commissioner's Recommendation by the Worker. On the 7 June 2019 the Rights Commissioner issued the following Recommendation:-

• “I recommend that the Worker accepts the changes to the premium payments that were introduced in 2014 by stealth and accepts the need to bring this dispute to a conclusion.

I recommend that the Employer pays her compensation of €3,500 for the improper handling of that matter and the breach of her employment contract.

○ This is to be paid within six weeks of the date below.

3 The Union on behalf of the Worker appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation to the Labour Court on the 2 July 2019 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969.

4 A Labour Court hearing took place on the 20 August 2019.

DECISION:

Background to the Appeal

5 This is an appeal on behalf of a Customer Service Manager (‘the Worker’) of a Recommendation of a Rights Commissioner (r-160848-ir-15/EH, dated 7 June 2019) under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. The dispute between the Worker and her employer – Argos Distributors (Ireland) Limited (‘the Company’) —concerns changes made by the Company in 2014 to certain premium payments for Sundays and Public Holidays. The Complainant has refused to accept the legitimacy of those changes as she maintains they were made unilaterally and without her consent.

6 The Rights Commissioner upheld the Worker's complaint. However, he recommended that she accept the changes that had been introduced by the Company and the need to bring the dispute to a conclusion. He also recommended compensation of €3,500.00 be paid to the Worker.

The Factual Matrix

7 The Worker commenced employment with the Company in May 1997. She was promoted to the position of Customer Service Manager in June 1998. She worked full-time hours and could be rostered to work Sundays and Public Holidays. Her contract of employment provided that she received a premium rate of time-and-a-half for all hours worked on a...