Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87627 Case Number: LCR11494 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CHADWICKS LTD - and - ITGWU |
Interpretation of a Company/Union agreement concerning redundancies at the former Walkinstown branch.
Recommendation:
5. The Court finds that the agreement reached at the conciliation
conference in March, 1986 does not debar companies other than
Chadwicks Ltd from opening on the Walkinstown site and the Court
does not therefore find in favour of the Union's claim.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Collins Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87627 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11494
CC87800 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11494
Parties: CHADWICKS LIMITED
(Represented by the Federated Union of Employers)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
(No. 5 Branch)
Subject:
1. Interpretation of a Company/Union agreement concerning
redundancies at the former Walkinstown branch.
Background:
2. In 1986 the Company closed its Walkinstown branch. An
official strike took place over the issue of compulsory
redundancies. Fifteen members of the I.T.G.W.U. No. 5 Branch were
affected. The issue was referred to the conciliation service of
the Labour Court and on 5th March, 1986 the Industrial Relations
Officer of the Court drew up a set of proposals in an attempt to
resolve the matter. This document stated, inter alia:-
"I note the Company's statement that the Walkinstown
branch is closed and its guarantee as given at the
conference on 5th March, 1986 that it will not re-open
a Chadwick's branch on the Walkinstown site. I note
also the intention of the Unions to carefully monitor
the Company's intentions to honour this guarantee".
The proposals were accepted in a ballot of the workforce, the
dispute ended and the Walkinstown branch was closed with a loss of
approximately forty jobs. In early 1987 refurbishment work
commenced on the Walkinstown site. In May the Union wrote to the
Company requesting a meeting to discuss the use of the site. The
matter was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Court on 19th May, 1987 and conciliation conferences took place on
9th June, 1987 and 10th July, 1987. In June, 1987 Payless D.I.Y.
Limited commenced operations on the site. The Union claimed that
former employees of Chadwicks Limited should have first refusal
for jobs there since Payless D.I.Y. Limited, like Chadwicks
Limited, is a subsidiary of Concrete Products of Ireland Holdings
Group. Chadwicks' management denied that it had authority to
concede this stating that Payless D.I.Y. Ltd. was a completely
separate legal entity. The matter was referred to the Labour
Court and a Court hearing took place on 5th October, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) When the Company closed its Walkinstown Branch the
workers believed that it would recommence trading of
some nature on the site. In this they have been proven
correct. This issue was central to the discussions
which took place at the time of the closure. The
proposals worked out at conciliation included a
guarantee that the Walkinstown Branch would not re-open
and it was this undertaking which swayed the Union
members to accept the proposals by a small majority.
The Company is now in breach of this Agreement.
(ii) Payless D.I.Y. Limited, like Chadwicks is a subsidiary
of Concrete Products of Ireland Holdings Group. It is
carrying similar stocks and the work being carried out
by staff is the same. None of the 40 staff made
redundant by Chadwicks have been employed by Payless.
(iii) Former members of management in Chadwicks are now
engaged the management of Payless.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) Payless D.I.Y. Limited is an independent legal Company
that is part of the CPI Holdings Group. This Company
has entered into a leasing arrangement with Chadwicks
Ltd for the use of the Walkinstown premises where they
operate a DIY business. Chadwicks Ltd cannot make any
comment on Payless DIY operations as it has no control
in its affairs. It cannot discuss with the Union any
issue relating to Payless DIY Limited.
(b) Any ex-Chadwicks staff who are now working with the
Payless DIY operation have been recruited by the latter
firm and have resigned from their employment with
Chadwicks Ltd.
(c) With regard to the Company/Union Agreement drawn up at
conciliation, the wording is very specific in applying
only to Chadwicks branches, and this was the specific
intention of the parties in coming to the agreement.
It was clear to the Directors at Chadwicks Ltd that in
the event that they were unable to realise the full
price of the site, that they would not be able to carry
the cost of maintaining such an expensive premises
indefinitely and that some from of activity would have
to be comtemplated.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court finds that the agreement reached at the conciliation
conference in March, 1986 does not debar companies other than
Chadwicks Ltd from opening on the Walkinstown site and the Court
does not therefore find in favour of the Union's claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M Horgan
30th October, 1987 --------------
A.K./U.S. Chairman