FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BANK OF IRELAND (BANKING 365) - AND - IRISH BANK OFFICIALS' ASSOCIATION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Carberry Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. B365 Comparators Clause.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns the Bank of Ireland call and contact centre, Banking 365, which are part of Bank of Ireland Group and employs approximately 400 workers . They are located predominantly in premises in Tallaght and, more recently, 50 are employed at a new location which has opened in Kilkenny which has a capacity for 500 employees. The issue is one of recognition.
- Discussion took place locally but as no agreement could be reached the matter was referred to the Labour
Relations Commission. A conciliation conference took place, but as no agreement could be reached, the
matter was referred to the Labour Court on the 13th of December, 2001, under Section 26 (1)(a)(b) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 5th of February, 2002.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS
3. 1. The attempt on the part of the Bank to insert a clause in respect of call centre comparators into a recognition agreement is unreasonable, unprecedented and unacceptable.
- 2. The Irish Bank Officials' Association is not seeking to restrict any argument that the Bank may wish to make in negotiations in the future. Equally, the Union representing the employees concerned should be free to argue a case on its merits.
3. The Bank, by restricting the Union from arguing a case as it arises, appears to be displaying a distinct lack of faith in the industrial relations machinery.
- 4. There is no precedent for a clause of this nature in recognition agreements in the Banking sector.
- 5. The IBOA is simply seeking trade union recognition on the same basis as exists in the rest of Bank of Ireland Group and the banking sector generally, i.e. with no restrictive conditions attached.
- 5. The IBOA is simply seeking trade union recognition on the same basis as exists in the rest of Bank of Ireland Group and the banking sector generally, i.e. with no restrictive conditions attached.
4. 1. Banking 365 is different in employment terms to the Bank of Ireland Branch. There are a limited range of functions which are carried out by the employees when compared to the branch.
2. Complex issues if they arise can be referred back to the account holding branch.
3. The terms and conditions of employees in Banking 365 correspond to and in many cases exceed those of the Call Centre Industry.
4. For the continued enhancement and maintenance of Banking 365, there has to be the ability to change quickly in order to adapt to the market place.
5. The Banks stance on the Euro, whereby the employees of Banking 365 were sufficiently different in terms of impact, and, therefore, received a different payment, was accepted by the IBOA.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court notes the employer's firm position that the only appropriate comparators for industrial relations purposes are other call centres.
While acknowledging the legitimacy of the employer's aspiration to make clear their position in future negotiations, the Court does not believe that the type of restrictive provision which they propose is appropriate to a recognition agreement.
The Court recommends that the employer should recognise the Union in respect of those of its employees which it has in membership, for normal industrial relations purposes including collective bargaining.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
27th February, 2002______________________
HMCD/MBDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Helena McDermott, Court Secretary.