Overview
Employees at Galway City Hall are set to bring their grievances to the Workplace
Relations Commission (WRC) over the council's €56.5 million relocation from
College Road to Crown Square. This dispute involves members of the Fórsa trade
union, representing local authority administrative staff, and engineering staff from
SIPTU, who have collectively decided to seek adjudication on the 10th of July, 2024.
Discontent
Significant discontent exists among the approximately 250 employees currently
based in the Council building on College Road. Many employees feel that details of
the move were not communicated effectively to them and there was little consultation
with them. Private contractors have been hired to plan the fit-out of the new offices in
Mervue, further agitating the Council’s employees. Employees are unhappy as they
have not been given any clear details on the timeline, the sequence of the move, or
what the process will entail.
Disturbance Money
In light of this, there is growing talk among employees about seeking disturbance
money, similar to the compensation provided to Dublin City Council employees
during a recent move. "It has to be fair, and it is standard that there would be some
compensation for a move," said one City Hall worker.
The move to Crown Square was initially approved by councillors in July 2020, shortly
after the Council Executive, led at the time by Brendan McGrath, unveiled the plans.
During a council meeting, Mr. McGrath had dismissed the idea of paying disturbance
money to staff relocating to Mervue.
While there is no statutory entitlement to disturbance money, Dublin City Council
employees recently received disturbance money for moving to a new premises.
Disturbance money is treated as salary and is subject to tax.
Employment Law
Under Irish Employment law, employers must provide their employees with certain
written terms of employment, including the place where the employee works. Some
employment contracts may have a relocation clause (sometimes called a mobility
clause). This enables employers to request their employees to move to a different
location within a specified area. However, if this isn’t in the employment contract,
employees may refuse to move and resign. Even without this clause, a work
relocation within a reasonable distance is allowed. There isn’t any specific law on
this requirement only the duty to act within reason. So, regarding forced relocation,
employment law requires the employer to act reasonably.
As the 10th of July adjudication date approaches, the outcome of the WRC case will
be closely watched by all parties involved, as it may set a precedent for how such
relocations and their associated costs are managed in the future.
