FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : TEAGASC - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Employer Member: Worker Member: |
1. Non payment of pension gratuities.
BACKGROUND:
2. Teagasc was established with effect from 1st September, 1988 under the Agriculture, Research, Training and Advice Act, 1988. Under the Act, An Foras Taluntais (AFT) and An Chomhairle Oiliuna Talmhiochta (ACOT) were dissolved and the staff transferred to Teagasc.
The dispute before the Court concerns the Union's claim that Teagasc should adhere to the terms of the Staff Superannuation Scheme (An Foras Taluntais Staff Superannuation Scheme, 1968) and pay pension gratuities to four technicians.
Under the terms of the Superannuation Scheme employees appointed before 1st January, 1968 may remain in pensionable or non-pensionable employment between the ages of 65 and 68. Where employees remain in non-pensionable employment after the age of 65 gratuities may be paid on cessation of membership of the scheme.
Management's position is that in early 1995, the Teagasc Authority decided in principle that superannuation gratuities should not be paid to staff in advance of retirement on the grounds that the final sentence of Section 7(d) of the Superannuation Scheme is discretionary (details supplied to the Court).
The matter was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference took place on 13th May, 1996. As agreement could not be reached the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 5th September, 1996 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 6th November, 1996.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Teagasc is obliged under the Staff Superanuation Scheme to pay the gratuities. In 1995 one employee received his gratuity and remained in employment.
2. Some employees made financial commitments on the understanding that their gratuities were guaranteed. This has caused considerable inconvenience.
3. The manner in which management decided to cease payment of the gratuities without any consultation with the staff is highly unsatisfactory.
4. The Staff Superannuation Scheme allows for employees to cease pensionable employment at age 65 and have their gratuities paid and continue in non-pensionable employment. Teagasc's interference with the Scheme is unacceptable to the Union.
5. The Union is seeking that the Court recommends that the gratuities be paid without further delay.
TEAGASC'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Teagasc Authority does not agree with the payment of gratuities at age 65 because this encourages staff to remain in employment beyond that age. The Authority is anxious to encourage research and technician staff to retire not later than age 65 as it is concerned about the unbalanced age profile of these categories of staff.
2. Management has taken a decision that superannuation gratuities should not be paid to staff in advance of retirement. This is not a structural change in the terms of the Superannuation Scheme applicable to such staff but represents a different approach in the matter to that taken by AFT. Teagasc does not accept that the Authority's decision constitutes a worsening of conditions of employment for staff formerly employed by AFT.
3. The original decision to include a provision whereby staff could continue in pensionable service to age 68 has been overtaken by events, i.e., the introduction of the scheme for professional added years.
4. In the event of Teagasc maintaining its position after completing its legal consultations, former AFT staff will continue to benefit from the provisions of the Superannuation Scheme which allow staff recruited prior to 1st January, 1968 to continue in pensionable service to age 68. Staff can still leave the Superannuation Scheme at any time after age 65 and remain in permanent non-pensionable service to age 68. The facility for remaining in employment to age 68 is unique in the public service.
5. The Authority should be allowed to exercise its discretionary power to discontinue the practice of paying retirement gratuities to ex-AFT staff while allowing them to continue in employment up to age 68.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is of the view that based on custom and practice and the terms of transfer the four claimants should be paid their gratuity forthwith.
The Court is also of the view that if Teagasc has a problem with the age profile of its staff it should discuss and negotiate with the Union as to an equitable resolution.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
22nd November, 1996______________________
F.B./D.T.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.