Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91625 Case Number: LCR13545 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: A.S. RICHARDSON LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim for Union Recognition.
Recommendation:
The Court recommends that the Company recognise the Union's
right to negotiate on behalf of those employees which it has in
membership.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Brennan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91625 RECOMMENDATION NO.LCR13545
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: A.S. RICHARDSON LIMITED
(Represented by the Federation of Irish Employers)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for Union Recognition.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is involved in the production of sawmill and
timber related products. It is located at Newtowngore, County
Leitrim where it employs 57 people. On 19th September, 1991
the Union requested a meeting with the Company to negotiate
terms and conditions of employment on behalf of 44 production
workers which it had taken into membership. The Company failed
to respond to this request. On 22nd November, 1991 the Union
referred the matter of union recognition to the Labour Court
under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A
Labour Court hearing took place in Cavan on 22nd January, 1992
(the earliest date suitable to the parties). Prior to the
hearing the Union agreed to be bound by the Recommendation of
the Court.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned voluntarily joined the Union.
They have a fundamental right of union representation on
all matters in regard to their employment. They have
shown great patience in the face of a blatant denial of
their fundamental rights.
2. The Union is a very responsible body which places a
heavy emphasis on stable industrial relations and the use
of procedures to resolve any disputes which may arise.
The Company should grant official recognition to the Union
immediately.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Since its establishment in 1970 the Company has
demonstrated a mature approach to the maintenance of good
industrial relations. Issues have been resolved locally
without the involvement of outside parties. The Company
is satisfied that this approach has stood the test of time
and should continue.
2. Traditionally, the mechanism for dealing with
collective issues in the Company has been the 'works
committee' which was made up of elected representatives of
employees. It is this body with whom the Company
negotiates and is therefore the only body recognised by
the Company for the purposes of negotiating terms and
conditions of employment.
3. The accurate reflection of interest in Union
membership along with the matter of choice as to whether
representational needs are best met by Union membership or
through the works committee remains undetermined to the
Company's satisfaction. This should be decided by an
independent ballot of all employees.
4. The Company does not consider that the granting of
union recognition would be helpful at this point in time
and the Court is asked to so recommend. Without prejudice
however to the Company position, should the Court so
recommend in favour of recognition then in the first
instance consideration should be given to 'limited
recognition' which would afford union members
representational rights on individual rights issues only.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court recommends that the Company recognise the Union's
right to negotiate on behalf of those employees which it has in
membership.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
4th February, 1992 _____________________
A.S./N.Ni.M.
Deputy Chairman