Iarnrod Eireann is not obliged to negotiate with train drivers' group judge

IARNROD Eireann is not obliged to negotiate with the breakaway Irish Locomotive Drivers' Association, the High Court decided …

IARNROD Eireann is not obliged to negotiate with the breakaway Irish Locomotive Drivers' Association, the High Court decided yesterday.

But Mr Justice O'Neill turned down a claim by the company against the association for damages arising from disputes in Athlone and Cork in July 1999 which resulted in the cancellation of a number of rail services and inconvenienced thousands of passengers.

Iarnrod Eireann had claimed that it was required as a matter of law to negotiate and conclude agreements on terms and conditions with trade unions recognised for such purpose by the company and possessing negotiating licences. It argued the association did not have a negotiating licence.

The defendants, from the national executive of the association, admitted they had engaged in the organisation of locomotive drivers but denied they had damaged the company's commercial credibility. The association said all of its members were employed by Iarnrod Eireann and that it sought to carry on negotiations for the fixing of wages and conditions of employment for its own members but not of other employees.

READ MORE

The association contended that it had 114 members who had resigned from SIPTU and the National Bus and Rail Union. It claimed Iarnrod Eireann had a duty to negotiate with it.

Mr Justice O'Neill held that the association did not have a negotiating licence and that the company did not have to negotiate with it. The company's claim for damages arose out of work stoppages in Athlone and Cork. The association claimed the stoppages were unplanned and spontaneous local events and that its executive had no knowledge of them until they were over. It also claimed it was not liable for damages.

The judge found that the evidence fell short of establishing that the association's executive had any liability for the stoppages. He said he would make no order on costs - meaning each side pays its own lawyers.