Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92178 Case Number: LCR13651 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: IRISH WHEELCHAIR ASSOCIATION - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Disputes regarding (1) the provision of information on a pension scheme and (2) a pay claim.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
recommends as follows:-
Pension Scheme:
(a) The Court is strongly of the view that all the
information required by the Union as to the past and
future state of the fund be issued forthwith.
(a) That on receipt of this information the parties
agree to a meeting in the presence of actuaries
from both sides to discuss the future of the scheme
and any amendments required.
(c) In the interests of the beneficiaries the Court
urges all parties to negotiate on the details of
the scheme as a matter of urgency.
Pay:
The Court notes the progress made between the parties
on this issue since the Conciliation Conference. The
Court also notes that talks on this issue are ongoing
and accordingly does not make any recommendation at
this stage. The parties are free to re-submit to the
Court in the event of failing to reach agreement.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Collins Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92178 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13651
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: IRISH WHEELCHAIR ASSOCIATION
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Disputes regarding (1) the provision of information on a
pension scheme and (2) a pay claim.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. PAY CLAIM:
The Union has made a claim on the Association on behalf of a
number of grades for specific pay relativities to be
established with similar grades in the health boards and local
authorities. The pay element formed part of the claim
forwarded to the Court by the Labour Relations Commission.
Local discussions on the claim are ongoing. At the Labour
Court investigation, the Union requested, that in the event of
the local discussions failing to reach agreement, that the
claim could be referred directly to the Court. The
Association did not object to this request.
2. PENSION SCHEME:
In July, 1973, a pension scheme was established (details
supplied) for the workers. In September, 1983, the scheme was
revised and benefits for workers were improved. Difficulties
arose almost immediately regarding worker contributions and
the status of the scheme (details supplied). As a result,
major funding problems have surfaced and the fund has a
serious shortfall. There is legal action pending by the
Association.
3. The Union in its dispute with the Association has been
seeking actuarial information about the scheme from the
insurers. This information has not been forthcoming and as a
result it has not been possible for the parties to agree to
negotiations about the scheme.
4. The disputes were referred to the Labour Relations
Commission and conciliation conferences were held on 18th and
19th April, 1991. The Association at the request of the
Industrial Relations Officer, instructed the insurers to
provide details of the scheme to the Labour Relations
Commission. The insurers failed to provide the information.
No further progress was possible on either dispute and they
were referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. A Labour Court investigation took place on
23rd April, 1992.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The pension scheme, in operation, was edorsed by the
insurers in the presence of the trustees of the scheme as late
as 24th June, 1988. It is clear to the Union that certain
aspects of the scheme went far beyond the benefits of almost
any pension scheme (details supplied). It was obvious that it
would certainly lead to difficulties despite the approval of
the insurers. When difficulties arose, no worker was covered
for pension entitlements for a period of 2 years and the only
benefit available despite paid contributions, was "death in
service" benefit. The insurers or the Association did not
inform the workers of these difficulties.
2. The proposed scheme (details supplied) is far less
advantageous for the workers than the previous scheme. The
Union, despite repeated requests over a long period of time
has not been able to secure any information about the scheme.
The Union is seeking actuarial information in relation to the
existing scheme and the proposed scheme. It is only when this
information has been professionally evaluated that meaningful
discussions can begin with the Association.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The pension scheme has had a number of difficulties over
the past years. The difficulties arose from not following the
correct procedures which resulted in no regulations being in
place to govern the scheme. In the 1980's, the National
Executive was advised by the then Chief Executive that the
scheme was in a very healthy state. No contributions were
made at a time of severe financial difficulty (details
supplied). The shortfall in the scheme came to light on the
retirement of the previous Chief Executive.
2. The pension fund needs careful examination in order to
regularise the difficulties. The Association proposes the
formation of a sub-group drawn from both sides with an
independent Chairperson. The sub-group would work out the
details of the scheme within the rigid constraints already
there. A number of positive effects on the fund have taken
place since last year (details supplied) and there are some
benefits which can be agreed as extras. The insurers have
been very co-operative in addressing the difficulties and a
recent letter (details supplied) is a fair and reasonable
statement of the present position.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
recommends as follows:-
Pension Scheme:
(a) The Court is strongly of the view that all the
information required by the Union as to the past and
future state of the fund be issued forthwith.
(a) That on receipt of this information the parties
agree to a meeting in the presence of actuaries
from both sides to discuss the future of the scheme
and any amendments required.
(c) In the interests of the beneficiaries the Court
urges all parties to negotiate on the details of
the scheme as a matter of urgency.
Pay:
The Court notes the progress made between the parties
on this issue since the Conciliation Conference. The
Court also notes that talks on this issue are ongoing
and accordingly does not make any recommendation at
this stage. The parties are free to re-submit to the
Court in the event of failing to reach agreement.
~
13th May, 1992 Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
J.F./U.S.
Evelyn Owens
-------------
Deputy Chairman
NOTE:
Enquiries concerning this recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary