Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88354 Case Number: LCR11944 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: DOUBLE CREST LIMITED - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND FINANCE |
Claim by the Union to represent a worker regarding pension matters.
Recommendation:
6. The Court finds that there is a sole negotiation agreement
between this Company and the Irish Transport and General Workers'
Union and in these circumstance the Court does not find grounds
for recommending concession of this claim for recognition of
another Union.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88354 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11944
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: DOUBLE CREST LIMITED
and
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union to represent a worker regarding pension
matters.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned in this case has 30 years service with
the Company. He is employed as a Warehouse Supervisor and is due
to retire on the 9th July, 1989. The conditions of employment of
the Company's workers are regulated by the Hosiery Industry, Joint
Industrial Council. Since 1969, these conditions include a
pension scheme.
3. The worker will be entitled to an industrial pension of £364
per annum. He will also be entitled to a State Pension. The
worker is not satisfied with the Pension rights accruing to him
and sought through the union, discussions with the Company on the
matter. The Company's position is that since it complies with all
Joint Industrial Council Agreements, there is no case to answer.
Furthermore, it contended that it had an agreement with the Irish
Transport and General Workers' Union, giving that Union sole
negotiating rights with the Company. The Manufacturing Science
and Finance union are claiming the right to be recognised by the
Company and to represent the worker. On 5th May, 1988, the matter
was referred to the Labour Court by the Union, under Section 20(1)
of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Union agreed to be
bound by the Court's recommendation. A Court hearing took place
in Dublin on 23rd June, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Union considers it very unjust that after 30 years
service, this worker's pension entitlement amounts to only
£364 per annum. Accordingly, it sought a meeting with the
Company to represent it's member, in order to explore means by
which the pension could be enhanced.
2. The worker is a member of this Union. It is his
constitutional right to be a member of any Union he wishes.
This Union, Manufacturing Science and Finance, has not seen
any written agreement which entitles the Irish Transport and
General Workers' Union to sole negotiating rights, and
believes that the Company should agree to discuss the matter
with the Union.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Company agreed to attend the Labour Court hearing on
this matter as a gesture of respect to the Court. It has no
case to answer. The Company has complied fully with all Joint
Industrial Council Agreements. Information relative to
pension benefits are circulated to each worker annually and at
no time did the worker suggest to the Company that he was not
fully satisfied with his position with regard to the Pension
Scheme. The worker had the option of increasing his benefits
by additional voluntary contribution, had he so desired. He
will also be entitled to a full State Pension.
2. The Company is not prepared to discuss the matter with the
Union because it is bound by its agreement with the Irish
Transport and General Workers' Union, which has sole
negotiating rights in the Company, and are a party to the
Hosiery Industry Joint Industrial Council.
3. The knock-on effects of altering the worker's pension
arrangements would be very serious indeed. Furthermore, the
repercussions of breaking the agreement between the Company
and the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union for sole
negotiating rights are not ones which the Company is prepared
to incur. Therefore, the Company cannot negotiate with
Manufacturing Science and Finance on this matter.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. The Court finds that there is a sole negotiation agreement
between this Company and the Irish Transport and General Workers'
Union and in these circumstance the Court does not find grounds
for recommending concession of this claim for recognition of
another Union.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M. Horgan
______________________
12th July, 1988. Chairman
P.F./J.C.