FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ANGLO IRISH BEEF PROCESSORS (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Severance package for short-time workers.
BACKGROUND:
2. The issue in dispute concerns the Unions’ claim for a severance package for workers who have a minimum of two years service and are on short-time working for a period of more than one month. The issue was the subject of local discussions and on the 18th of June the Company outlined principles which it said must be agreed before any discussions could take place on a severance package. The Company stipulated that for employees to be eligible they must have at least two years' continuous service; employees whose normal working week is 39 hours must be on less than 19.5 hours per week for not less than 18 continuous months and must earn less than half their basic pay throughout the same period of 18 continuous months. The Company also stated that employees who, with management consent, opted to work less than 39 hours per week would be excluded from claiming any severance package. Any employees who do receive a severance package may not join a competitor Company within twelve months of leaving AIBP.
Agreement could not be reached at local level and the issue was the subject of a
conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission on the
11th of July, 2001. The Company opposed concession of the Unions' claim and the
issue was referred to the Labour Court on the 27th of July, 2001, under Section 26(1)
of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on the 28th of
September, 2001, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The meat industry, and AIBP in particular, can no longer be afforded the luxury of keeping its workers on short-time working for long periods each year. Employees should be permitted to earn a full week's wages and, if this is not possible in AIBP, they should have access to a voluntary severance package in order to start a new career elsewhere.
2. The Unions have no difficulty with the requirement that employees must have two years' service, although continuous service is more problematic. There is also no problem with excluding employees who opt to work short-time. However, the Unions are opposed to the Company's other preconditions. The period on short-time work should not exceed one month (the Company stipulates 18 months) and anything less than 39 hours constitutes short-time working (not less than 19.5 hours).
3. The basic pay in the Company is £225.00 (285.69 Euro) per week and it is ludicrous to suggest that it would be reasonable to keep a worker on £115.00 (146.02 Euro) per week for 18 months. The legality of trying to prevent a worker who has accessed a voluntary severance package from working for a competitor company is also questionable.
4. If the Company cannot organise its business to provide greater continuity of employment and more certainty about the duration of any short-time working, it should make available a modest voluntary severance package of four weeks' pay per year of service plus statutory. Many workers may not seek to avail of the package, but those who are genuinely anxious to have full-time permanent employment should receive a modest compensation.
COMPANY’S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company is resolutely opposed to concession of this claim. There is no precedent for such a claim either in the meat industry or, indeed, in Irish industry as a whole. Concession of the claim could result in the closure of plants as a result of people opting to leave their employment eight weeks after they have been put on short-time which, as defined by the Unions, is “less than five days”.
2. Short-time working is endemic in the industry and is accepted as the norm. During the busy season long working hours per day are usual and earnings are high. Any calculation of earnings based on the Unions' timescale of eight weeks on short-time would reflect the busy period only, and would not reflect the overall earnings position which would take account of both higher and lower earnings. This would result in a non-representative period of earnings as the basis for calculation.
3. Concession of the Unions' claim would enable workers to demand an enhanced severance package to leave their employment, while the Company is seeking to retain their services. Although the Company cannot hold on to an employee who wishes to leave, it should not be required to pay him/her anything other than statutory obligations where they apply.
4. In the past workers have left the Company to take up employment with a competitor Company and at least one has then sought re-employment with AIBP. Under the Unions' claim, the Company would have been required to pay these ex-employees a severance payment which would enable them to ease a competitor's labour shortage problem and exacerbate AIBP's.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court notes the offer made on behalf of the Company in the letter from IBEC dated 18th June, 2001.
In the circumstances of this case, the Court recommends that the Company's offer be accepted subject to a review of the operation of the scheme after a period of two years.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
22nd October, 2001______________________
D.G./C.C.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Dympna Greene, Court Secretary.