Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89578 Case Number: LCR12568 Section / Act: S67 Parties: BANK OF IRELAND - and - IRISH PRINT UNION |
Claim by the Union for enhanced severance terms following the closure of the printing house.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions of the parties the Court is
of the view that, in the context of the Bank, the position of the
printers is unusual insofar as their alternative to redundancy
involves loss of salary and increased working hours.
The Court recommends that the Bank's offer be amended, for those
not qualifying for Bank pension, to provide for an additional
week's pay per year of service.
The Court also recommends that, for those printers choosing
re-deployment, the compensation package proposed by the Bank
should be extended to include a once off payment of 62 times the
value (at their new rate) of the 3 hours per week additional
working time which will be required of them.
The Court does not recommend concession of the other claims.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Brennan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89578 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12568
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: BANK OF IRELAND
and
IRISH PRINT UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union for enhanced severance terms following the
closure of the printing house.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Bank has decided to close the printing department in
College Green as from 29th September, 1989 as it was no longer an
essential part of the Bank's operation. Apart from
management and office staff, a total of seven printing staff and
four general workers are employed. At local discussions
Management stated that there were options for redeployment in the
Bank porter/security area, and also for redundancy settlements.
They put the following proposals to the Unions.
(i) Redeployment as porters at the top of the scale.
(ii) Employees who had completed 10 years' service and are
50 years of age or over would be eligible for a pension
and lump sum payment equivalent to 4 weeks' pay for
each completed year of service. Statutory redundancy
would also apply.
(iii) Employees below 50 years of age who did not qualify for
a pension would receive a lump sum payment equivalent
to 5 weeks' pay for each completed year of service plus
statutory redundancy.
The Union representing the four general workers accepted the
proposals. The Union concerned in this claim rejected the
proposals arguing that as the forced closure of the printing
department created compulsory rather than voluntary redundancies
the terms offered should be improved. The Union is claiming that
the Bank should increase its offer on severance terms in relation
to pension and redundancy entitlements, that home loans should be
continued at their present preferential rate, and an employee who
left the Bank's employment nine months ago should be included in
the terms offered. The Bank rejected the Union's claim and the
dispute was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Court on the 28th July, 1989. Conciliation conferences were held
on the 9th and 14th August, 1989 but no agreement was reached.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation on the 31st August, 1989. A Court hearing was held
on the 8th September, 1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Bank have offered to compensate for loss of overtime
and for red circling by offering payment of 62 times the
weekly loss in overtime plus the difference in the top of the
redeployment scale at the present rate. The workers concerned
joined the Bank with the expectation of retiring at age 65.
They now have to suffer a loss, as a result of the Bank's
decision. Bank porters (the area of transfers) work a 40 hour
week. The workers concerned work 36 hours. Therefore they
will have to work an additional 4 hours per week for the basic
rate of pay. The Union would also point out that a lower
salary will lead to a loss of bonus and shares as these are
based on salary.
2. There have been a number of redundancy settlements of over
six weeks' per year of service and the Union sees no reason
why that should not apply in this case.
3. The working of overtime in the Bank was on a permanent
basis and in fact a recent agreement states there would be a
guaranteed minimum of 28 hours overtime per month.
Effectively this meant that the workers concerned had an
average of seven hours overtime per week, and in the light of
the Bank's decision to close the Union sees no reason why this
overtime, which was on a regular basis and by agreement,
should not be incorporated into the pension calculation.
4. The Union is seeking 7 years additional credits to be
included into all calculations. This claim is made on the
basis that the Bank do not employ apprentices, therefore all
their employees had served their time before taking up
employment with the Bank. In recognition of this fact 7 years
additional credits should be included and is a reasonable
claim.
5. The Bank state that they are debarred by law and pension
fund rates from paying a pension to anyone under age 50. This
has created an anomalous position where by two of the workers
concerned with the same service, leaving the Bank's
employment, are leaving on different terms. One will have a
pension and the other will not, as he is under 50 years of
age. This is a most unfair and unjust situation and with
goodwill from the Bank, the problem could be overcome by an
appeal to Revenue Commissioners.
6. Home loans were agreed by the staff when they were taking
them out, this was in full expectation of the workers
continuing in the Bank's employment. Now through no fault of
their own they have to leave the employment of the Bank and
are being informed that this will affect their preferential
rate. They will suffer a substantial loss.
7. The worker concerned retired on a disability pension nine
months ago. The Union claims that the Bank must have been
aware of the closure of the printing department and therefore
should have included the worker in the closure terms. The
Union requests the Court to recommend that the worker be
included in the terms offered by the Bank for closure.
BANK'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In the event of workers opting for redeployment the Bank
has offered compensation for loss of earnings to the extent of
62 times the weekly difference. This offer has been made
notwithstanding that some overtime will accrue in any new
position taken up within the Bank.
2. The level of compensation being paid by the Bank in the area
of redundancy payments compares favourably with other schemes
in the financial services area particularly against the
backdrop of the Bank offering redeployment into other areas as
a first and preferred option. Having regard to the fact that
the statutory redundancy entitlement is being applied in
addition to the four/five week formula, the redundancy terms
are in excess of the terms of the Bank's voluntary parting
package for staff under its plan to improve competitiveness.
3. In discussions with the Union on the issue of pensions for
those who had completed ten years service, but had not
attained the age of 50, the Bank has conceded fully to the
Union's claim in this regard in that it has offered as an
alternative to the offer at 2(iii) above to purchase credit
for the workers' bank service in the Union's industrial
pension subject to the Bank's lump sum in that case being
equated to 4 weeks pay for each year of service. This
concession was in recognition of the fact that these employees
wished to continue in the trade and join the printers pension
scheme.
4. The Bank have agreed to modify their position on the home
loan issue and this concession to the Union's claim is
significant. It was proposed that the home loan would
continue at the current preferential rate of 3% for 12 months
after departure date and 8% fixed thereafter on condition that
on departure date 25% of the total severance payment would be
lodged in permanent reduction of the loan. The fixed
preferential rate arrangement after 12 months protects the
individual against interest rate reductions into the future.
5. The Bank could not include the worker who left the job 9
months ago in the settlement terms. The worker concerned was
on sick leave since October, 1987 and in 1988 he approached
Management with a suggestion that he might retire on a
disability pension. This was afforded on medical advice and
when he retired he was replaced by another worker who was
appointed to a permanent post. The Bank was not aware of the
impending closure of the printing department at this time.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions of the parties the Court is
of the view that, in the context of the Bank, the position of the
printers is unusual insofar as their alternative to redundancy
involves loss of salary and increased working hours.
The Court recommends that the Bank's offer be amended, for those
not qualifying for Bank pension, to provide for an additional
week's pay per year of service.
The Court also recommends that, for those printers choosing
re-deployment, the compensation package proposed by the Bank
should be extended to include a once off payment of 62 times the
value (at their new rate) of the 3 hours per week additional
working time which will be required of them.
The Court does not recommend concession of the other claims.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
___________________
_22nd__September, 1989. Chairman
T.O'D/J.C.