Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD8976 Case Number: LCR12386 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: MALLEE PRINT AND PACKAGING - and - IRISH PRINT UNION |
Claim by the Union for recognition and negotiating rights.
Recommendation:
4. The Court notes that the Company did not respond to the
invitation from the Court to attend the hearing.
Based on the evidence before it the Court recommends that the
Company recognise the I.P.U. in respect of the workers it has
organised in the Knock Plant.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD8976 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12386
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: MALLEE PRINT AND PACKAGING
and
IRISH PRINT UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union for recognition and negotiating rights.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company operates two plants in the West of Ireland. In
September, 1988 applications for membership of the Union were
received from 6 workers at the Company's Plant in Knock. The
workers who were not members of any other union were accepted into
membership. On 10th October, 1988 the Union representative wrote
to the general manager of the Company, informing him of the fact
that the Union had members in the Company, and seeking to arrange
a meeting. When he did not receive a reply to this letter, the
Union representative sought to contact the general manager by
phone. He eventually did so, and after one cancelled meeting, the
parties met on 4th January, 1989. The Union contends that at this
meeting the Company agreed to recognise the Union, and promised to
forward a letter to this effect to Union headquarters. This
letter was not forthcoming. When the Union again made contact
with the Company by phone it was informed that the Company could
not recognise the Irish Print Union as it had a single Union
agreement with the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union
covering its two plants. The Company stated that it was its
intention to amalgamate the two plants. The Union put it to the
Company that since the I.T.G.W.U. had no members in the Knock
plant the Company could not have a sole negotiating agreement with
it. The Company did not respond to this but promised to confirm
its position in writing. This confirmation was not received, and
on 31st January, 1989 the matter was referred to the Labour Court
under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. Prior
to the heaing the Union agreed to be bound by the recommendation
of the Court. A Court hearing took place in Galway on 18th April,
1989. The Company did not attend.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Union has a long and proud history of representing Print
workers in the country. It is acknowledged generally as being
a responsible trade union and is affiliated to the Irish
Congress of Trade Unions (I.C.T.U.). The workers concerned
approached the Union with regard to membership because they
believed it was the most appropriate union to represent their
interests.
2. There is presently no other union with members in the
Knock plant, consequently the Union is the only union which
can meaningfully have an agreement with this Management. If
the two plants merge in the future, union membership can be a
matter of discussion between the unions involved. The
I.C.T.U. has a procedure for dealing with such a situation.
It would be the Union's intention to approach this situation
in a reasonable manner.
RECOMMENDATION:
4. The Court notes that the Company did not respond to the
invitation from the Court to attend the hearing.
Based on the evidence before it the Court recommends that the
Company recognise the I.P.U. in respect of the workers it has
organised in the Knock Plant.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
________________________
10th May, 1989. Deputy Chairman
P.F./J.C.