FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : BALLYMOUNT PRECISION ENGINEERING LIMITED - AND - TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr Rorke |
1. Check-off system - deduction of Union dues at source.
BACKGROUND:
2. In February, 1998 the Union, on behalf of up to 178 members, sought a meeting with the Company, with a view to establishing a recognition agreement between the parties. Agreement in principle was reached by mid-April, 1998 on a recognition/procedural agreement. The Union claims that the issue of the deduction of Union dues at source was one of a number of issues outstanding when the ballot was held on the recognition /procedural agreement. The Company's position is that it had made it clear to the Union from the outset that it could not facilitate the deduction of dues at source, for administrative reasons.
The Union referred the matter to the Labour Court, in accordance with Section 20 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Court carried out its investigation on the 6th November, 1998.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The dispute concerns whether or not the Company should deduct Union contributions from the wages of its employees and remit same to the Union from time to time. The Union has sought advice in this matter and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment submitted a copy of the Employer-Labour Conference report to the Union on the 16th September, 1998, in this regard. The report recommends that "Employers shall give sympathetic and favourable consideration to trade union requests for the introduction of check-off facilities". Since the issuing of the report 25 years ago, employers nationally have accepted its recommendations. The deduction of monies from wages is a mere formality and does not require any special arrangements to be put in place by the Company.
2. In all the circumstances pertaining to this case, the Company should co-operate with the union in operating a check-off system, with immediate effect.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The collection of Union dues from members is the responsibility of the Union. It is not the responsibility of the Company and there is no obligation on the Company and no requirement in law for the Company to deduct dues at source.
2. The deduction at source could not be accommodated due to the level of administrative work required which could stretch an already over-stretched wages department. When the issue of a sick-pay scheme was proposed, the Union accepted, as valid, the Company's reasons as to why it could not be adequately administered internally.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court considered the submissions of the parties and, in the interest of industrial relations harmony, suggests that the Company should endeavour to find a way to facilitate the Union with regard to the deduction of union dues at source.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
1st December, 1998______________________
MK/BCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.