Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88911 Case Number: AD897 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: MITSUI DENMAN (IRELAND) LIMITED - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioners Recommendation No. ST425/88 concerning a claim for compensation for loss of earnings as a result of a re-organisation within the Company.
Recommendation:
10. On the basis of the evidence submitted, the Court does not
find any grounds upon which it can recommend any alteration in the
Rights Commissioner's Recommendation.
The Court therefore decides that the Recommendation be upheld and
that the appeal should fail.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Shiel Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88911 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD789
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 13(9)
PARTIES: MITSUI DENMAN (IRELAND) LIMITED
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioners
Recommendation No. ST425/88 concerning a claim for compensation
for loss of earnings as a result of a re-organisation within the
Company.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is owned by Mitsui Mining & Smelting Company
Limited, Mitsui & Company Limited (both Japanese) and the
Department of Finance. The Company commenced production in 1976
and its product electrolytic manganese dioxide is exported
worldwide to dry battery manufactures.
3. Towards the end of 1986 the Company circulated the group of
unions with a document titled "consolidating operations" which
outlined the severe difficulties which the Company was facing in
the market place. Over the following two months the Company
examined all aspects of its production operation and prepared an
"action and corrective plan" in February, 1987. This plan was
circulated to all of its employees as well as being discussed with
the Union and shop stewards.
4. The plan dealt with various cost saving measures including the
question of revised manning levels and changes in work practices
and method of compensation to cover all losses sustained by
workers as result of the changes. The changes outlined in the
plan were implemented from April, 1987. The worker here concerned
was promoted to the position of chargehand in August, 1980 which
carries grade 1 rate of pay. As a result of the rationalisation
plan the cell re-arranging area was reduced from a 3 shift to a 2
shift rota, resulting in the loss of one chargehand position. The
worker concerned was told following discussions that he was no
longer needed as chargehand and he lost his grade I chargehand and
rate. He was reverted to the "pool" (a group of workers who were
slotted in where and when work dictated). He then applied for and
got a position in product finishing which carries grade 2 rate and
operates on a 3 shift basis.
6. The Union referred his case to a Rights Commissioner who,
investigated the case on the 30th August and issued the following
recommendation dated 6th September, 1988:-
"It is always traumatic experience for any worker who has been
promoted to a position of management, to revert back to the
tools so to speak. The "A and C plan" however, was concerned
with the survival of the Company. I think the Union did a
very good job in protecting the employment and winning
concessions or compensation for loss of premia, a redundancy
deal, and a relatively good wage deal. In the circumstances
whiles sympathising with the claimant, I do not find the
Company in the circumstances acted unreasonably in his case.
I recommend that his claim fails."
7. The Union appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation to
the Labour Court under Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1969. The Court heard the appeal in Cork on 11th January,
1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
8. 1. The worker concerned enjoyed a good standard of living way
in excess of what he has now. He was also demoted from a
supervisory position and lost the grade 1 chargehand rate.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
9. 1. The changes and final settlements were the subject of
detailed discussions between all the parties concerned with
the assistance of the conciliation service of the Labour Court
(details supplied to the Court). The workers were informed at
all times of developments during the course of these
negotiations. The final settlement plan was accepted by all
the unions and the worker concerned.
2. The worker has received the agreed monetary terms of the
Company's Action and Corrective Plan which as designed to deal
with a total change in Company operations.
DECISION:
10. On the basis of the evidence submitted, the Court does not
find any grounds upon which it can recommend any alteration in the
Rights Commissioner's Recommendation.
The Court therefore decides that the Recommendation be upheld and
that the appeal should fail.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
_________________________
31st January, 1989 Deputy Chairman.
M.D./J.C.