Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89291 Case Number: LCR12452 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: HOSPITAL JOINT SERVICES BOARD - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Dispute concerning guaranteed permanent pensionable employment and pension entitlements.
Recommendation:
6. The Court having considered the submissions from the parties
is not satisfied that the Union's claim for compensation is
sustained and accordingly the Court does not recommend concession
of the claim.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89291 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12452
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: HOSPITAL JOINT SERVICES BOARD
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
AND
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning guaranteed permanent pensionable employment
and pension entitlements.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Board was set up as a commercial state sponsored body with
the function of providing laundry and sterile supplies services to
hospitals on a national basis. Following a number of years of
commercial and financial difficulties the Government decided that
the Board should cease its operations and offer the enterprise for
sale as a going concern. On 10th February, 1989 it was sold to a
private company, this sale was subject to acceptance by the unions
and workers involved and following a vote the transfer was
accepted. All non-management workers were taken on by the new
company with the same terms and conditions of employment which had
applied in the Board. While employed by the Board the workers
were covered by the terms of the Local Government Superannuation
Schemes for pension purposes. On transferring the workers had the
option of having their pension preserved or receiving a refund of
superannuation contributions (less 10% income tax). Workers not
covered were awarded ex-gratia payments. The workers were also
entitled to join the new company's private pension scheme.
3. On 15th February, 1989 the Union referred a claim on behalf of
the workers for compensation for the loss of security of
employment and for the adverse effects of the change on pension
entitlements, to the conciliation service of the Labour Court.
The Department of Health and Board's position was that the workers
transferred following a vote accepting the arrangements and that
claims for compensation prior to this and the sale had been
rejected. On 24th April, 1989 the Union referred the matter to
the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation under
Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Union
agreed to be bound by the recommendation of the Court. The Court
investigated the dispute on 15th June, 1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The workers joined the Board as a state body and had an
expectation to remain in the public sector for the rest of
their working lives. However, they now find themselves in the
private sector without any guarantee of secure employment and
the workers' pension entitlements have been adversely
affected. The options made available to the workers for
superannuation purposes have put them at a serious
disadvantage.
2. The workers co-operated with the Board in a number of
major rationalisation schemes in the past which resulted in
the workers suffering serious financial losses. In spite of
this however, the workers have been transferred to the private
sector against their will and none were facilitated in their
request to remain within the public sector although workers in
the officer grade have remained in the public sector. The
workers should receive a suitable amount of compensation for
their losses.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. There was full consultation with the unions, workers, and
ICTU prior to the transfer to the new company, which was
contingent on the preservation of all jobs and acceptance by
workers and unions of arrangements. The workers were fully
advised of the arrangements, including pension rights and
accepted the new arrangement in a ballot conducted by the
unions. All claims for compensation were rejected by the
Board's management prior to the transfer and all workers
transferring received a once-off tax free signing on fee and
signed contracts of employment for the new employers.
2. In relation to pensions, the workers had the option of
preserving their pensions or getting a refund of contributions
and a number of workers not covered were awarded ex-gratia
payments. On transferring the workers were entitled to join
the new company's pension scheme which is a highly attractive
one (details supplied to the Court).
RECOMMENDATION:
6. The Court having considered the submissions from the parties
is not satisfied that the Union's claim for compensation is
sustained and accordingly the Court does not recommend concession
of the claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court,
Evelyn Owens
___3rd____July,___1989. ___________________
U. M. / M. F. Deputy Chairman.