Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86870 Case Number: LCR10977 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: KILMARTIN PRINTERS - and - IPU |
Union recognition.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends that the Company should recognise the union's
right to negotiate on behalf of its members in the employment.
The Court notes the difficult trading position of the Company and
this should be taken into account in any negotiations between the
parties.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86870 THE LABOUR COURT LCR10977
SECTION 20(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 10977
PARTIES: KILMARTIN PRINTERS
and
IRISH PRINT UNION
Subject:
1. Union recognition.
Background:
2. There are 7 employees and 2 Directors in the Company. In
March, 1986, four workers: three printers and one worker in
'origination' applied and were accepted for membership of the
union. (Recently, one of the printers withdrew from membership of
the Union, but a worker employed in 'finishing' joined shortly
afterwards). On 26th June, 1986, the Union wrote to the Company
informing it of the membership and requesting a meeting to discuss
union recognition and to review conditions of employment of the
workers. This request was rejected by the Company and on 8th
August, 1986, the Union requested the assistance of the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. On 11th August, 1986,
the Company and the Union were invited to attend a conciliation
conference, however the Company declined the invitation and on
10th November, 1986, the Union referred the matter to the Labour
Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969,
for investigation and recommendation. The Union agreed to be
bound by the Court's recommendation. The Court investigated the
dispute on 12th January, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) The Union concerned is a respected one, has a good
relationship with other printing companies and is
affiliated to the Irish Congress of Trade Unions.
(ii) There are no major problems with the present pay and
conditions of employment in the Company and no claims
have been served on the Company by the Union. It is
difficult therefore to understand why the Company will
not recognise the Union.
(iii) Printing companies with workers who are members of
this Union vary in size from very small to large, some
of which would be in competition with this Company.
The workers have the right to join the Union and to be
represented by it.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) The Company is a small family run business and cannot
afford the possible effects of union recognition. The
Company is only just breaking even and is of the
opinion that union recognition may bring about claims
for increases in wages, etc. in the future, which the
Company cannot afford.
(b) The Company's main competitors are small and
non-unionised. This Company's operation because it is
small is different to the larger unionised print
companies.
(c) The Company is mainly involved in trade work which
currently accounts for approximately 70% of the
turnover, and on which margins are very tight. The
remainder is in direct sales which is more profitable,
however this market is shrinking due to over capacity
in the printing industry. The Company would like to
employ more workers, e.g. a salesperson to promote
direct sales work, but cannot afford to do so.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends that the Company should recognise the union's
right to negotiate on behalf of its members in the employment.
The Court notes the difficult trading position of the Company and
this should be taken into account in any negotiations between the
parties.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
2nd February, 1987 Nicholas Fitzgerald
U.M./P.W. Deputy Chairman