FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : GREENSTAR MATERIALS RECOVERY LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Union Recognition / Terms and Conditions of Employment.
BACKGROUND:
2. National Waste Management Limited was part of the Celtic Waste Group until March, 2003 whereupon it, along with other companies in the group, amalgamated under the "Greenstar" name. The Union took a number of workers into membership and in August, 2002, sought a meeting with Management to discuss all aspects of its members terms and conditions of employment. The Company indicated that it was carrying out an audit review of all its business interests. The review included terms and conditions of employment health and safety, workplace conditions and Union recognition and membership. Management envisaged that implementation across the group would be effected from 1st January, 2003 and that any meetings in the meantime would be premature. The Union sought to refer the issue to the Labour Relations Commission but the Company was not agreeable to the referral. On the 5th February, 2003 the Union referred a complaint to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the 24th April, 2003.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The rates of pay obtaining in the Company are the lowest in the group and must be increased substantially. The Company has not paid the relevant phases of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness (PPF). The Union seeks an hourly rate for all employees instead of payment on a unit basis.
2. A standard 39 hour working week should be introduced with overtime rates thereafter as follows:
(a) T.5 for the first four hours up to midnight
(b) Double time thereafter up to normal starting time next day
(c) T.5 for first hours on Saturday. Double time thereafter
(d) Double time all day Sunday
(e) Public Holidays-Double time plus time in lieu.
3. The Union seeks the introduction of a pension scheme in the line with that recommended in LCR 17398 for another group company- Noble Waste Limited.
4. The Company's Grievance and Disciplinary procedures should be amended to allow for Union representation when required by employees. If necessary grievances/disputes to be referred to a third party i.e Rights Commissioner, Labour Relations Commission, Labour Court, as appropriate.
5. In relation to Union recognition and collective bargaining members are only seeking that which is enjoyed by other employees in group companies who have a full working relationship with the Union.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In recent months the Union approached Management of the Company and another Group Company-Noble Waste, regarding recognition and representation rights for members. The Noble Waste dispute was the subject of a Labour Court investigation and recommendation (LCR 17398 refers). Following receipt of this recommendation Management suggested to the Union that the service of the Labour Relations Commission be engaged. Management is willing to progress matters through a facilitated process such as that outlined in the Code of Practice on Voluntary Disputes Resolution (S.I No.145 of 2000).
2. The Company has implemented substantial improvements in employees' terms and conditions of employment, including a basic pay increase, sick pay scheme, pension arrangements, bonus scheme, health insurance cover, and grievance and disciplinary procedures.
3. These conditions of employment have been implemented in the Group's other companies and have, by and large, been endorsed by the Court in LCR 17398.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the submissions of both parties. The Company indicated a willingness to process this dispute through the procedures of the Code of Practice on the Voluntary Dispute Resolution (SI 145 of 2000), made under Section 42 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Union is unwilling to go through this route, opting instead for a referral under Section 20 (1), Industrial Relations Act, 1969.
The Union indicated that it had ten drivers in membership. In the circumstances, the Court recommends that the Company should recognise the Union's right to represent its members for industrial relations purposes including negotiations on pay and conditions of employment.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
7th May, 2003______________________
TODDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.