Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91366 Case Number: LCR13433 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: WATERFORD FOOD PLC - and - AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT & GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Dispute concerning a guarantee of at least thirteen weeks' work for thirteen seasonal workers in order to qualify them for social welfare benefits or, alternatively, that they be allowed avail of the Company's voluntary severance package.
Recommendation:
8. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court takes the view that, where for two consecutive seasons the
Company is unable to provide a minimum of 13 weeks' work to the
seasonal workers on the list concerned, those workers should
become entitled, if they so wish, to claim the terms of the
Company's voluntary severance scheme.
The Court so recommends.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Brennan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91366 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13433
THE LABOUR COURT
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: WATERFORD FOOD PLC
and
AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT & GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning a guarantee of at least thirteen weeks'
work for thirteen seasonal workers in order to qualify them for
social welfare benefits or, alternatively, that they be allowed
avail of the Company's voluntary severance package.
BACKGROUND:
2. There are 33 seasonal workers employed by the Company at its
Plant in Dungarvan. Some have service going back to 1977 and have
been employed continuously every season for periods averaging nine
months per season.
3. In the past 2 years a number of seasonal workers (13) have
been employed for periods of eight weeks. This has adversely
affected their social welfare entitlements.
4. The Union is seeking that these workers be guaranteed a
minimum of 13 weeks' work (this would requalify them for
unemployment benefit) for next season or, alternatively, that they
be allowed avail of the Company's voluntary severance package.
The Company is unable to give the guarantee sought and state that
the question of redundancy will not arise until the workers are
due to resume work i.e. March/April, 1992.
5. As agreement could not be reached at local discussions the
dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission on 15th
May, 1991. A conciliation conference was held on 11th June, 1991
at which no agreement was reached. On the 17th July, 1991, the
Commission reported to the Labour Court that no further efforts on
its part would advance the resolution of the dispute. The parties
requested the Court to investigate the dispute. A Court hearing
was held in Waterford on 11th September, 1991.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The workers have long service with the Company and their
ambition has been to be made permanent. However, in view of
rationalisations which have taken place in the dairy sector
over the years, they are unlikely to be made permanent.
2. The reduction in the length of the season has imposed
hardships on the workers. The majority of them are at an age
at which it is difficult to secure alternative employment.
3. The Company is a multi-million pound operation and is in
a position to guarantee the workers 13 weeks' work or
alternatively pay those who wish to claim redundancy.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. Over the past number of years the volume of milk
processed at Dungarvan has decreased significantly for a
variety of reasons (details supplied to the Court). As a
consequence the periods of time for which seasonal workers are
required has shortened.
2. The Company is not in any position to guarantee seasonal
work for any specific period. Seasonal work depends on
volumes of milk to be processed and product mix.
3. The workers are not entitled to claim redundancy until
such time as they are due to resume work. It would be
unrealistic to pay redundancy now and to have to employ
additional people next year .
RECOMMENDATION:
8. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court takes the view that, where for two consecutive seasons the
Company is unable to provide a minimum of 13 weeks' work to the
seasonal workers on the list concerned, those workers should
become entitled, if they so wish, to claim the terms of the
Company's voluntary severance scheme.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_______________
7th October, 1991
M.D. / U.S. Deputy Chairman