Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93103 Case Number: LCR13971 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: ROBERT USHER AND COMPANY LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
A dispute concerning the level of redundancy offered to workers.
Recommendation:
The Court has fully considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their oral and written submissions. Given all of the
circumstances of this dispute the Court recommends that the
redundancy terms being offered by the Company be increased to two
weeks pay per year of service plus statutory entitlement.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93103 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13971
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: ROBERT USHER AND COMPANY LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. A dispute concerning the level of redundancy offered to
workers.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company was founded in 1879 and manufactures cotton
towels under the name of Greenhills Towels. The Company was
taken over in 1962 by Ashton Brothers who in 1968 became part
of the Courtaulds Textile Group (U.K.).
2. The Parent Company in England announced, on the 26th
January, 1993, that the Irish Plant would close on the 26th
February, 1993 with 137 workers being made redundant. The
Union are seeking improved redundancy terms and referred the
matter to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation
conference took place on the 8th February, 1993. Agreement
could not be reached and the matter was referred by the
Labour Relations Commission to the Labour Court on the 9th
February, 1993. The Court investigated the issue on the 19th
February, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The redundancy terms offered by the Company fall short
of normal redundancy settlements.
2. Many employees would have 15-20 years service, be in
their late forties, early fifties and would have little
chance of alternative employment.
3. The Company's argument that this is a closure and as
such they would be justified in only paying statutory
redundancy, cannot be accepted.
4. The Company only made a loss in one year.
5. The fact of different redundancy packages for employees
represented by different unions is unacceptable.
6. The workers suggested the introduction of a world class
manufacturing system before the announcement of the closure.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The towelling industry has gone through a difficult
period over the last three years with low priced imports and
the effects of the recession.
2. Wages paid abroad are well below those paid in Ireland.
3. Sales have fallen over the last number of years.
4. The redundancy package offered is a generous one.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has fully considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their oral and written submissions. Given all of the
circumstances of this dispute the Court recommends that the
redundancy terms being offered by the Company be increased to two
weeks pay per year of service plus statutory entitlement.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
5th March, 1993 Tom McGrath
P.O.C./M.H. ____________________________________
Deputy Chairman.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.