Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92652 Case Number: LCR14148 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: DROGHEDA (OIL AND FATS) LIMITED - and - AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Dispute concerning (a) annual holidays, (b) pension benefits.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties, and on the
basis of the evidence produced, the Court is satisfied that the 2
employees enjoyed 21 days annual leave prior to their transfer to
Drogheda (Oil and Fats) Limited and accordingly carried that
benefit with them subsequent to take-over.
With regard to the matter of pension in respect of one named
claimant, the Court is not satisfied that the Company have taken
adequate steps to assure the employee that his previous
entitlement has been protected under the transfer to new ownership
and that contributions in respect of his current employment have
been made and accordingly recommends that these details be
finalised and furnished to the employee within a period of 6 weeks
from date of this hearing.
The Court so recommends.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92652 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14148
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: DROGHEDA (OIL AND FATS) LIMITED
and
AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning (a) annual holidays, (b) pension benefits.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company blends and stores edible oils. It was taken
over by its present owners in April, 1991. The claim is on
behalf of the 2 workers employed by the Company, a Production
Manager and an Administration Worker. There is disagreement
between the parties on the issues of annual holiday
entitlements and pension benefits.
2. (a) Annual Holiday Entitlements
This issue affects both workers and revolves around their
actual holiday entitlements. The workers claim that they had
a holiday entitlement of 21 days' per annum plus public
holidays prior to the takeover. The Company claims that
according to a document completed for the takeover, the
workers have only received 15 days' holidays per annum. The
Union is claiming is that the workers are due the following
days leave:
Production Manager 1991 - 8 days,
1992 - none
Administration Worker 1991-4
1992-2.
3. (b) Pension Benefits
This issue only affects the Production Manager who has been
making pension payments since 12th April, 1991 under the
previous management (details supplied). Since the takeover
the worker has continued his own payments but has no evidence
that the Company has made its contribution or that his
payments have been passed on to the insurance company.
4. The Union was not able to secure a meeting with the
Company to resolve the above issues. The Company also refused
invitations to conciliation by the Labour Relations
Commission. The Union referred the disputes to the Labour
Court on 10th November, 1992 under Section 20(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court investigation
took place in Drogheda on 29th June, 1993 (the earliest date
suitable to both parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. (a) Annual Holiday Entitlements
The workers have enjoyed a holiday entitlement of 21 days' per
annum since 1988. Following the takeover in 1991 the Company
attempted to cut the workers' entitlement by 6 days. The
workers can prove their entitlements by a memorandum from the
previous Managing Director which sets out, as required by law
prior to the takeover, their working conditions (details
supplied). Any diminution in working conditions is
unacceptable to the workers.
2. (b) Pension Benefits
The Production Manager has been making monthly pension
payments of #38.92 since 12th April, 1991. The Company was
also due to make payments of #58.33 per month. The worker has
no certificate of membership of the pension scheme, no
receipts for money paid from his salary and no proof of the
Company's contribution to date. The worker requires
documentation to prove that both his and the Company's
payments are deposited in an accredited pension scheme.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. (a) Annual Holiday Entitlements
Prior to the finalisation of the takeover, a fifth schedule
was prepared as required by law. The annual holidays as set
out in the schedule states 3 weeks. The information was
provided by the previous owners of the Company and was very
carefully put together prior to the takeover. The new Company
accepts the information on the 5th schedule as factual. The
terms of employment as set out were crucial to the purchaser.
2. (b) Pension Benefits
The issue of the worker's pension is ongoing. The brokers
have been instructed to produce a quotation and the worker's
deductions will be held in trust. The brokers secured a
substantial transfer from the previous owners. The scheme is
not yet finalised and the cost to the Company will have to be
addressed. The Company will take the matter up with the
brokers.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties, and on the
basis of the evidence produced, the Court is satisfied that the 2
employees enjoyed 21 days annual leave prior to their transfer to
Drogheda (Oil and Fats) Limited and accordingly carried that
benefit with them subsequent to take-over.
With regard to the matter of pension in respect of one named
claimant, the Court is not satisfied that the Company have taken
adequate steps to assure the employee that his previous
entitlement has been protected under the transfer to new ownership
and that contributions in respect of his current employment have
been made and accordingly recommends that these details be
finalised and furnished to the employee within a period of 6 weeks
from date of this hearing.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
____________________
22nd July, 1993. Deputy Chairman.
J.F./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.