Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95509 Case Number: LCR14929 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: IRISH STEEL LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Redundancy terms for temporary/casual workers.
Recommendation:
Based on the information before the Court, it is not possible to
quantify the extent of the problems being addressed, or the number
of people involved.
Taking into account the information before it, the Court makes the
following recommendation:
For those casuals who had been employed on a regular basis (6
months plus on average per annum) over the last 6 years, and
who have not been given work by the Company since the new
agreement, redundancy payments pro-rata to #1,200 for
full-time employees per year of service, inclusive of
statutory payments, should be made by the Company to those
claiming redundancy.
Division: Mr Flood Mr Pierce Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95509 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14929
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
IRISH STEEL LIMITED
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
Redundancy terms for temporary/casual workers.
BACKGROUND:
The dispute concerns the application of redundancy terms to
temporary/casual workers in the Company. Most of the workers
concerned would be senior employees.
As part of a major survival plan in 1994, the Company reduced
the number of permanent workers from 561 to 356. This issue
was dealt with in Labour Court Recommendation No. LCR 14506.
The redundancy terms which applied to the 205 workers were
#1,200 per year of service to a maximum payment of #36,000.
The Union is claiming that redundancy entitlements for
temporary workers should be linked to LCR No. 14506. The
Company maintains that it cannot pay redundancy terms to
temporary workers unless they themselves claim and qualify
for redundancy under the Redundancy Acts. In that case, they
would be paid statutory redundancy.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission.
At a conciliation conference on 24th August, 1995, the Union
suggested that workers with 2 years' service or longer should
have an entitlement to payment in excess of statutory. The
Company was not agreeable and the dispute was referred to the
Labour Court on 31st August, 1995, in accordance with Section
26(1), Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court
hearing took place on 20th September, 1995, in Cork.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The Company's survival plan in 1994 has led to reduced
employment opportunities for a number of temporary workers,
e.g. (1) the Company can now decide whether or not to replace
a worker on leave, (2) the workforce can be supplemented with
contract workers, (3) previously, the Company was obliged to
employ temporary workers on a seniority basis. It can now
employ workers on a skills basis. This has reduced and, in
some cases, eliminated the employment of senior temporary
employees.
2. The workers concerned who are made redundant will find it
very difficult to find alternative employment because of
their age profile. The redundancy terms agreed in LCR No.
14506 were very low - #1,200 per year of service inclusive of
statutory.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
1. During discussions between the parties, the Company informed
the Union that the redundancy programme was based on three
shift working in the Melt Shop and four-shift working in the
Mill and associated departments. Temporary workers are not
included in these numbers.
2. The issue in dispute was not raised by the Union during the
Labour Court Hearing which resulted in LCR No. 14506. It
was, therefore, not a cost factor considered by the Company
when accepting that recommendation. The Company cannot pay
redundancy to temporary workers unless they claim and are
entitled to it under the Redundancy Acts.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the information before the Court, it is not possible to
quantify the extent of the problems being addressed, or the number
of people involved.
Taking into account the information before it, the Court makes the
following recommendation:
For those casuals who had been employed on a regular basis (6
months plus on average per annum) over the last 6 years, and
who have not been given work by the Company since the new
agreement, redundancy payments pro-rata to #1,200 for
full-time employees per year of service, inclusive of
statutory payments, should be made by the Company to those
claiming redundancy.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
9th October, 1995 Finbarr Flood
C.O.N./A.K. ---------------
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.