FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : GANDON ENTERPRISES LTD (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr McHenry Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Pension.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company was established in 1994, on a pilot basis,to provide paid employment to people with physical or hearing disabilities. It is part of the Rehab Group. Initially, it employed approximately two hundred and fifty people around the country. Included in this number were about sixty staff who transferred into Gandon from the Rehab Groups National Training and Development Institute (N.T.D.I.).
The Union claims that in 1995 an agreement was reached at the Labour Relations Commission covering the terms and conditions of both permanent and N.T.D.I. staff transferring to Gandon. The agreement provided for the same pension rights as permanent staff in the Rehab Group. The pension in Rehab is non-contributory.
The Company claims that the pilot scheme was originally due to run from 1994 to 1996 and a decision to be taken by the Department of Health as to whether it would be made permanent. No decision has yet been made as to whether it will be made permanent. A pension scheme can only be provided for these workers when the pilot scheme is made permanent and extra funding provided by the Department of Health.
Management made an offer in 1998 to implement a new type of pension scheme based on a 6% employer/4% employee contribution. This offer was rejected by the Union.
As no agreement was possible between the parties the dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. Conciliation conferences were held on the 18th of August, 1999 and the 1st October, 1999 but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 15th of November, 1999 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on the 4th of February, 2000 (the earliest date suitable to the parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Department of Health should provide the additional funding to cover the cost of the pension scheme for all staff in Gandon Enterprises Ltd.
2. The proposal by the Company to implement a "defined contributions" scheme has been rejected by the members.
3. The group of workers concerned in this claim are the lowest paid category of worker within the Rehab Group. The Union wants equality of treatment for its members.
4. The Union is insisting on adherence to the agreement entered into at the Labour Relations Commission in 1995.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company put forward proposals for an alternative pension scheme for the workers concerned which was rejected by the Union.
2. The introduction of a non-contributory pension for workers would force the Company out of business unless extra funding is secured.
3. The Company has been supported financially (£2.5m) by the Rehab Group from 1995 to 1998. 50% of Gandon's enterprises are loss making.
4. Many of the Company's competitors do not have sick pay schemes or pension schemes.
5. The Company is not in a financial position to implement the 1995 agreement unless extra funding is secured.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Court is satisfied that the agreement entered into between the parties, at the Labour Relations Commission in April 1995, is a valid subsisting agreement, which should be honoured and implemented.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
11th February, 2000______________________
LW/CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.