Aer Lingus has been told by the Labour Court that it cannot force Shannon-based cabin crew to transfer to Dublin against their will.
The company had sought to move 45 cabin crew to Dublin because of a change in transatlantic flight arrangements.
Eighteen staff opted for voluntary redundancy and two agreed to move, leaving 25 at the centre of a dispute between the company and their union, IMPACT.
Management said it was entitled to transfer the staff under a clause in their contracts allowing the company to post them "in any station in Ireland or abroad". It told the court it needed to transfer the staff as part of its drive to cut costs and transform Aer Lingus into a low fares airline.
IMPACT, however, denied the company had a right to permanently transfer staff without agreement. In a recommendation vindicating the union's stance, the court said a facility did exist for the company to post cabin crew to any location on a temporary basis.
"However, the court is of the view that this clause does not give the company the absolute right to transfer staff on a permanent basis against their will from (in this case) Shannon to Dublin."
It said there had been no precedents to substantiate the interpretation of employment contracts taken by the company. The court said the parties should immediately open talks on a range of other cost-saving options put forward during previous discussions between the sides. These included an extension of unpaid leave arrangements, new rosters allowing Shannon-based crew to be rostered for duty from other locations and an extension of a voluntary severance scheme.
The recommendation was welcomed by IMPACT official Ms Christina Carney. "We're very pleased with the outcome and we're committed to making the discussions work," she said.
A spokeswoman for Aer Lingus said the company was studying the recommendation. The airline had 25 cabin crew too many at Shannon and it would be looking for ways to address staff surpluses.
The court recommended that the renewed discussions between the sides should be completed within five weeks. An initial meeting took place last Thursday.
The company had earlier rejected an IMPACT proposal that the cost-savings sought could be achieved through rolling unpaid leave of two months duration. It said it was prepared to consider unpaid leave patterns of five or seven months, but this in turn was rejected by the union.
Management told the court that the airline had made every effort to resolve the dispute, including offering voluntary severance, redeployment, unpaid leave and various rostering permutations.
