FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : YOUGHAL CARPET YARNS - AND - 32 WORKERS (REPRESENTED BY O'DONNELL, BREEN WALSH, O'DONOGHUE, SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr Rorke |
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation 3/98.
BACKGROUND:
2. In December, 1996, the Company announced its intention to sell its Killacloyne plant. At a meeting on the 22nd of January, 1997, the prospective new owner put forward a number of conditions which had to be accepted by the workforce to enable the sale to proceed. The conditions included a number of redundancies, new rates of pay, changes in operational requirements, changes in shift working and payment of wages by credit transfer. A number of amendments to the proposals were made with the assistance of the Labour Relations Commission and a ballot was held on the 12th of February, 1997. The majority of SIPTU members rejected the proposals but an aggregate vote of all employees accepted them. The Company then implemented the agreed changes over the following months, including the payment of wages by credit transfer. However, 32 employees, who are members of SIPTU, refused to accept the new method of payment. Discussions were held with both SIPTU and with the employees concerned and the issue was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation. His recommendation issued on the 21st of January, 1998, as follows:-
"In the circumstances, I recommend that the Union and its members accept that employees at the plant no longer have the right to be paid in cash and that the Company now has the right to pay all its employees by credit transfer. I would also recommend that the Company continue to address the issue in a sensitive manner and take whatever steps are necessary to enable the change to be implemented in a reasonable way."
The 32 employees appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, on the 4th of March, 1998. The Court heard the appeal on the 8th of April, 1998, in Cork.
WORKERS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned were refused access to the Rights Commissioner's hearing and were prevented from having a legal representative present.
2. Section 3(2) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991, specifies that the right to be paid in cash is a legal right which should not be taken from employees without their consent. The issue of payment of wages was raised on the 22nd of January, 1997, and was rejected. Later discussions concentrated on productivity and manning levels.
3. On a number of occasions members of SIPTU have rejected Management's attempts to change the method of payment of wages. At the very least a further vote should be taken by SIPTU members only to ascertain the method of payment.
4. On a practical level the employees would incur considerable costs in travelling to and from banks, in setting up bank accounts and in paying bank charges and fees. The nearest banks with appropriate facilities are in Midleton and Glanmire.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company has had exhaustive discussions with both SIPTU and the 32 claimants over the past twelve months. It has adhered to all of the established industrial relations procedures including attendance at the Labour Relations Commission and at a Rights Commissioner's hearing.
2. The issue of payment of wages by credit transfer was first notified to the workforce on the 22nd of January, 1997, and was also the subject of subsequent discussions. All employees, including the claimants, voted on the Company's proposals which were accepted by an aggregate vote of all employees.
3. The Company has fully complied with its obligations and duties under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991. It has entered into an agreement with the workforce to pay wages by a mode other than by cash as specified in Section 2 of the Act. It is also in accordance with the Rights Commissioner's recommendation.
DECISION:
The Court agrees with the findings and recommendation of the Rights Commissioner.
The appeal is dismissed and the Rights Commissioner's recommendation upheld.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
17th April, 1998______________________
D.G./D.T.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Dympna Greene, Court Secretary.