Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94303 Case Number: LCR14534 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: BEAMISH AND CRAWFORD LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claims for compensation for loss of earnings.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions from the parties and noting that
the number of employees to be compensated for loss of earnings has
risen to eleven, a number which could not have been anticipated by
either party the Court recommends that the Company increase the
amount it is prepared to pay out to #140,000 and that the parties
meet to agree a formula for paying out this sum between the 11
claimants. This method of calculating compensation to be treated
by all parties as exceptional and not creating any precedents for
the future.
On the acceptance of the above recommendation by both parties the
strike notice and protective notice if still in existence should
be withdrawn.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94303 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14534
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
BEAMISH AND CRAWFORD LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claims for compensation for loss of earnings.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute before the Court concerns the Union's claim for
compensation for loss of earnings on behalf of 11 workers who
were employed by the Company in "distribution (8)", and
"technical services (3)". They were re-deployed within the
brewery as part of the rationalisation agreement concluded
between the parties in May, 1994.
The Union claims that the Company has reneged on a commitment
made on 14th April, 1994, to pay compensation at an agreed
formula of 2 years plus 8 weeks.
The Company's rationalisation proposals were the subject of
conciliation conferences under the auspices of the Labour
Relations Commission on 16th/17th/18th May, 1994. The
dispute concerning loss of earnings compensation was referred
by the Labour Relations Commission to the Labour Court on
24th May, 1994, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took
place in Cork on 13th July, 1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. It was the Union's understanding at negotiations that
workers employed in technical services section would not
be affected by compulsory redundancy. It was
understood that all workers employed in this section
would be offered positions with the new contractors.
2. An agreement was reached on 14th April, 1994, which
removed the threat of compulsory redundancies in the
distribution section. This provided that a number of
workers be offered positions with the contractors and
the remainder to be re-deployed within the brewery. The
overall agreement would not have been possible if the
workers seeking re-location had not been offered loss of
earnings compensation of 2 years plus 8 weeks.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The long established agreement in operation in Beamish
and Crawford has been a compensation factor of 52 weeks
plus up to 8 weeks phase out in cases where employees
were subject to loss of earnings due to the Company
requiring them to transfer to a lower paid job. The
Company has at all times indicated its willingness to
apply this principal in the present case.
2. In one case in 1991 the Company agreed to make a payment
of 104 weeks plus up to 8 weeks phase out under
circumstances of extreme pressure.
3. Part of the terms of settlement of the Company's
rationalisation proposals was that this issue would be
referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation.
4. During the course of negotiations which led to the
conclusion of the rationalisation agreement the Union
clearly indicated that the number of its members who
would elect to transfer to lower paid jobs would be
small.
5. On the clear understanding that the number would not
exceed 7, the Company undertook to favourably consider a
compensation factor of 104 weeks plus up to 8 weeks
phase out (at a cost to the Company, of #123,000). In
the event, 14 members elected to transfer. Subsequently
3 opted to take redundancy and the number now claiming
compensation is 11.
6. The Company will not accede to the Union's claim to pay
the excessive claim to 11 who actively sought
alternative employment in posts long accepted as
seasonal in nature. Whilst the Company do not consider
it appropriate to pay any compensation in the current
circumstances, the Company is prepared to honour the
earlier commitment to pay compensation and is prepared
to do so to the value of the original proposal, on any
reasonable formulae which is acceptable to both parties.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions from the parties and noting that
the number of employees to be compensated for loss of earnings has
risen to eleven, a number which could not have been anticipated by
either party the Court recommends that the Company increase the
amount it is prepared to pay out to #140,000 and that the parties
meet to agree a formula for paying out this sum between the 11
claimants. This method of calculating compensation to be treated
by all parties as exceptional and not creating any precedents for
the future.
On the acceptance of the above recommendation by both parties the
strike notice and protective notice if still in existence should
be withdrawn.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
5th August, 1994 Evelyn Owens
F.B./M.M. __________________
Deputy Chairperson
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.