Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88949 Case Number: LCR12245 Section / Act: S67 Parties: NATIONAL CATERING ORGANISATION - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim for an improvement in the terms of redundancy settlement for a former employee.
Recommendation:
5. It is evident to the Court that the worker concerned left her
employment because of a series of misunderstandings, as she was at
no time redundant since suitable alternative employment was
available to her. The Court, in the circumstances, does not
consider enhanced redundancy payment appropriate but, having
regard to the fact that the worker concerned has lost the benefit
of her service with the Company, through no fault of her own,
recommends she be paid a sum of #500 compensation.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88949 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12245
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: NATIONAL CATERING ORGANISATION
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for an improvement in the terms of redundancy settlement
for a former employee.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned was employed as a waitress in the
Executive Dining Room at the Bank of Ireland, College Green, from
June, 1977 until she was made redundant in December, 1987. The
parties disagree as to what exactly transpired at the time of her
redundancy. The Company claim that she was given the option of
either taking redundancy or accepting an alternative position of
head office relief executive waitress. This is disputed by the
worker and the Union. They claim that the only mention of
alternative employment involved casual work which was not suitable
to the claimant and for that reason she opted for redundancy and
was paid her statutory entitlement of #1,410.85. The Union, on
her behalf, is seeking an ex-gratia payment of three weeks' pay
per year of service in addition to her statutory entitlement. The
Company has rejected the claim. Following the failure of local
level discussions the matter was the subject of a Labour Court
conciliation conference on the 20th June, 1988, at which no
agreement was reached. Following referral of the matter to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation on the 15th
December, 1988, a Court hearing was held on the 13th January,
1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3.1 In early December, 1987, the claimant was informed by the
Company's National Catering Group Manager for the Bank of
Ireland Group that the executive dining room was being
closed. She was subsequently advised that it would be better
to accept redundancy as the Company had no suitable
alternative permanent employment for her.
3.2 The Union did not become involved in the matter until a week
before the worker was due to be made redundant. At no time
did the Company indicate to the Union that it was negotiating
separately with the claimant despite the fact that there is
provision for discussion on such matters in the Company/Union
agreement. When the matter was brought to the Company's
attention, it rejected the Union's claim and contended that
it was not obliged to offer anything over and above the
statutory entitlement.
3.3 At the conciliation conference, the Company stated that the
claimant was offered similar employment in the Bank of
Ireland Head Office in Baggot Street. The Union emphatically
denies that she was offered full-time permanent employment
other than casual work. No written offer of employment was
made to her since her employment was terminated in December,
1987.
3.4 In view of the claimant's satisfactory service to the Company
over eleven years of her employment, she was entitled to an
offer of continuous employment in a similar capacity. As
this was not offered she is now seeking compensation at a
rate of three weeks' pay per year of service.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4.1 There are no provisions in the Company/Union agreement for
redundancy settlements and in the past each case was dealt
with on its merits. The maximum enhancement paid by the
Company was three weeks per year of service and this was a
specially negotiated package for a short term construction
site contract. In most other cases only the statutory
entitlement was paid.
4.2 On the 9th December, 1987, the claimant was informed that the
Executive Dining Room Service was to be terminated and that
she could opt for redundancy or accept an alternative
position of head office relief executive waitress which is a
permanent position. No offer of enhanced payment above the
statutory amount was made. The claimant decided to opt for
redundancy and she duly received her statutory entitlement of
#1,410.85. The Company is satisfied that it acted in a
proper manner and that the claimant had a clear choice of
alternative employment if she so wished.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. It is evident to the Court that the worker concerned left her
employment because of a series of misunderstandings, as she was at
no time redundant since suitable alternative employment was
available to her. The Court, in the circumstances, does not
consider enhanced redundancy payment appropriate but, having
regard to the fact that the worker concerned has lost the benefit
of her service with the Company, through no fault of her own,
recommends she be paid a sum of #500 compensation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
31st January, 1989 John O'Connell
DH/PG Deputy Chairman