Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88452 Case Number: LCR11946 Section / Act: S67 Parties: OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS - and - IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION |
Claim by the union that compulsory lay-off should not apply to its members.
Recommendation:
5. The Court does not accept that there is a valid case for the
exclusion of work study assessors from such periods of short-time
working as may occur in 1988 in the drainage construction section.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88452 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11946
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS
and
IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the union that compulsory lay-off should not apply to
its members.
BACKGROUND:
2. The workers involved in this dispute are work study assessors
involved in drainage construction work. In November, 1987, the
Office of Public Works (O.P.W.) indicated to the unions concerned
that it required 130 redundancies in the drainage construction
area due to severe financial cut-backs. Six redundancies were
sought among the work study assessors. Five assessors took
voluntary redundancy and one was redeployed, thus satisfying the
O.P.W's immediate requirements. The remainder of the work-study
assessors were assured that no compulsory redundancies would be
required of them throughout 1988. The overall number of
redundancies required by the O.P.W. were not forthcoming. An
attempt was made to enforce compulsory redundancies among the
general workforce employed on the drainage schemes but in L.C.R.
11632, the Labour Court recommended against this approach as it
was contrary to the terms of the Programme for National Recovery.
As an alternative to redundancies the O.P.W. proposes the
implementation of lay-offs. This would amount to ten weeks in
total in 1988. The union, on behalf of the work study assessors,
claims that this group should be exempted from the lay-offs
because they have provided the savings necessary through their own
voluntary redundancies. The union also claims that it was it's
understanding that there would be no compulsory lay-offs in 1988
once the required number of voluntary redundancies was forthcoming
from the work-study assessors. Agreement could not be reached at
local level and on 14th March, 1988, the matter was referred to
the conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference took place on 20th June, 1988. Agreement was not
reached and on 22nd June, 1988, the matter was referred to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court
hearing took place in Dublin on 30th June, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. By providing the required number of volunteers for
redundancy, the union has fulfilled its part of the bargain
with the O.P.W.. It has achieved the amount of savings
required from its section of the workforce. The workers are
now being asked to suffer on the double by way of lay-offs
before the end of 1988.
2. It was the union's understanding that once it provided the
level of savings requested, there would be no further
redundancies or lay-offs throughout the remainder of 1988.
The union considers it most unfair that the O.P.W. now seeks
to enforce lay-offs on it's remaining members.
3. Lay-offs have very serious implications for the workers
over and above the immediate loss of earnings. The danger of
permanent redundancy is a constant worry in drainage
construction. The workers concerned in this dispute have very
long service with the O.P.W. but any lay-offs in 1988 will
adversely effect the calculation of gratuity lump sums should
any or all of them be made redundant next year. Once again
the workers would be doubly penalised.
O.P.W.'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Within the context of a greatly reduced budget, the O.P.W.
has got to achieve savings in its drainage operations. The
overall number of voluntary redundancies have not been
achieved. In L.C.R.. 11632 the Labour Court recommended
against compulsory redundancies finding that these would be
contrary to the terms of the Programme for National Recovery.
The only realistic option remaining to the O.P.W. in order to
stay within budget is the introduction of lay-offs.
2. The only agreement which the O.P.W. has with the Union
relates to compulsory redundancies in 1988. The union is
excluded from any possibility of these since a sufficient
number of its members opted for voluntary redundancy. There
was no agreement of any kind concerning lay-offs. The O.P.W.
has no commitments to the union in this matter.
3. There could be no justification for excluding the work
study assessors from lay-offs when all other sections of the
workforce were subject to them. This would be unjust and
would have serious repercussions. Apart from these
considerations the work study assessors carry out a service
function which could be completely redundant if all other
operations were suspended during the lay-off period. There
would be nothing for the assessors to do in the absence of the
"works" arm of the drainage service.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court does not accept that there is a valid case for the
exclusion of work study assessors from such periods of short-time
working as may occur in 1988 in the drainage construction section.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M. Horgan
______________________
12th July, 1988. Chairman
P.F./J.C.