Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95300 Case Number: AD9555 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: IRISH GLASS BOTTLE COMPANY LIMITED - and - A WORKER |
Appeal by the worker against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. BC29/95.
Recommendation:
The Court considered the submissions made by the parties.
Based on the history of the case the Court could find no grounds
on which to change the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation. The
Court therefore rejects the appeal and upholds the Rights
Commissioner's Recommendation.
The Court so decides.
Division: Mr Flood Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95300 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD5595
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
IRISH GLASS BOTTLE COMPANY LIMITED
AND
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the worker against Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation No. BC29/95.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned was employed by the Company for many
years and left the employment in 1979 due to ill health. He
received a lump sum payment of #1,400. The Company maintains
that the worker left the employment of his own volition and
that in accepting the severance payment he had foregone his
pension entitlements. In 1990, on reaching the age of 65
years the worker approached the Company seeking a pension.
Management rejected his claim. The dispute was referred to a
Rights Commissioner in 1992 and agreement was reached between
the parties whereby the worker accepted #1,000 from the
Company in settlement of his claim. In 1993 the worker again
approached the Company seeking a pension. His claim was
rejected and the dispute was again referred to a Rights
Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. The
Rights Commissioner investigated the dispute on the 11th
April, 1995. In his findings the Rights Commissioner
stated:-
"1. I have some sympathy for the worker and I note the
intensity and sense of conviction with which he
expressed his case.
2. However, I must also note the statement of
withdrawal of claim made by the worker on 28th
January, 1992 in the offices of Colin Walker,
Rights Commissioner. This statement of withdrawal
was in consideration for a goodwill payment of
#1,000 and was given and understood to be in full
and final settlement of any claim regarding the
employment and any rights pertaining thereto
including pension and sickness benefits. I also
note that this statement of withdrawal was
witnessed by a solicitor acting on behalf of the
worker. The worker himself signed it along with a
representative of the Company."
(The parties were named by the Rights Commissioner).
On the 9th May, 1995 the Rights Commissioner issued his
recommendation as follows:-
"In the light of the above I must find that the claim
must fail and I recommend accordingly."
On the 9th May, 1995 the worker appealed the Rights
Commissioner's recommendation to the Labour Court. The Court
heard the appeal on the 19th June, 1995.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. In accepting payment of #1,400 from the Company in 1979
the worker was not made aware that this payment included
a buy out of his pension rights. The question of such a
buy out was not discussed. The worker was under the
impression that the lump sum payment was in respect of
his long service with the Company. The worker did not
sign a document foregoing his pension entitlements and
the Company holds no such written record.
2. The worker is not literate and at the Rights
Commissioner's hearing in 1992 was not made fully aware
of the settlement negotiated on his behalf. He feels
that he has been unfairly treated by the Company and is
entitled to a pension.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In 1979 the worker approached the Company and sought a
severance payment. He was advised at that time that it
would be detrimental to his own interests to sever links
with the Company because he would lose his pension
entitlements. He could not be dissuaded and the Company
agreed a settlement with him in the amount of #1,400.
The pension fund trustees of the time were notified and
he was taken off the pension list.
2. Many workers, over the years, have left the Company of
their own accord and none including the worker
concerned, would have retained any vested rights within
the pension scheme.
3. The worker accepted a payment of #1,000 at the Rights
Commissioner's hearing in 1992. The Company offered
this payment as a goodwill gesture. The worker accepted
it in full and final settlement of all claims against
the Company.
DECISION:
The Court considered the submissions made by the parties.
Based on the history of the case the Court could find no grounds
on which to change the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation. The
Court therefore rejects the appeal and upholds the Rights
Commissioner's Recommendation.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
27th June, 1995 Finbarr Flood
T.O'D./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman