Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94252 Case Number: LCR14490 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: POWER SUPERMARKETS LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning severance terms for job-sharers.
Recommendation:
Having reviewed the submissions of the parties, having regard to
the general practice in relation to the calculation of service in
respect of non-statutory redundancy payments in the Company, and
in the absence of a definitive Company/Union agreement on this
matter, the Court recommends that the Union accept the payments
proposed by the Company in this case.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr Brennan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94252 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14490
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
POWER SUPERMARKETS LIMITED
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning severance terms for job-sharers.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. Power Supermarkets Ltd, trading as Quinnsworth, Crazy
Prices and Lifestyle employs over 6,500 staff in over 70
branches throughout Ireland. The administrative grades
comprise permanent whole-time and permanent part-time
staff. The job-sharing concept was introduced in 1991.
2. In 1993, the Company announced 26 redundancies arising
from the introduction of new technology. The Company's
suppliers were going to input their invoices directly to
the Company's computer and thereby by-pass a whole
section of staff in Quinnsworth Head Office. The
Company received sufficient volunteers and many have
already left the Company with the balance due to leave
over the coming months. Among the volunteers for
redundancy were some job-sharers many of whom had long
service but with only 2 or 3 years as job-sharers. The
Union sought the calculation of the redundancy for the
job-sharers on the following basis:-
1. Total full-time service.
2. Each two years as a job-sharer to count as one
year.
3. Use the full-time equivalent salary.
The Company rejected this and offered to use a formula
of total service multiplied by 75% of equivalent
full-time salary. the matter was referred to the labour
relations commission and a conciliation conference was
held on the 26th january, 1994. agreement could not be
reached and the issue was referred to the labour court
on 4th may, 1994. the court investigated the dispute on
16th june, 1994.
union's arguments:
3. 1. the normal provisions for calculating redundancy for
part-time workers is that each two years of part-time
service is calculated as one, added to the former
full-time service based on a notional full-time salary.
2. to calculate redundancy any other way than outlined
would place job-sharers at a disadvantage.
company's arguments:
4. 1. the voluntary redundancy terms have been accepted by
over 20 staff, 15 of whom were job-sharers.
2. the non-statutory lump sum was calculated in accordance
with normal practice in the company, i.e., by reference
to complete years of service and basic weekly rate of
pay as at the date of redundancy.
3. the application of 75% of the equivalent full-time rate,
as a once-off, for the job-sharers in this case is
extremely generous and discriminates in their favour.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having reviewed the submissions of the parties, having regard to
the general practice in relation to the calculation of service in
respect of non-statutory redundancy payments in the Company, and
in the absence of a definitive Company/Union agreement on this
matter, the Court recommends that the Union accept the payments
proposed by the Company in this case.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
8th July, 1994 Kevin Heffernan
P.O.C./D.T. _______________
Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.