FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : GILMORE FOOD SERVICES (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Pay and conditions.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is involved in the importation and distribution of fresh and frozen food products to the food service/catering industry. There are currently 11 employees in various categories of employment such as warehouse, administration and drivers.
The issue concerns 2 drivers (formerly 4) who are seeking to be represented by the Union in the event of disputes in the Company. The Union first approached the Company in January, 2001. The Company's case is that it deals directly with staff on an individual basis and does not see any need for collective bargaining with the Union.
The Union referred the case to the Labour Court on the 9th of July, 2003, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 29th of October, 2003, the earliest date suitable to the parties. The Union agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union tried to resolve the dispute by referring it to the Labour Relations Commission but the Company would not attend a conciliation conference.
2. Workers have a constitutional right to be represented by their Trade Union. The workers concerned have found negotiations with the Company without professional representation to be frustrating and fruitless.
3. There are a number of issues, including health and safety, clothing and tea-breaks which need to be addressed.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Terms and conditions of employment are very good in the Company. Basic pay rates are better than many other competitors in the industry.
2. There are only 2 out of 11 employees seeking Union representation. The Union does not represent the majority of workers represented by the Union.
3. The Company has always engaged in an "open door" policy and has found it more beneficial to deal directly with staff on all matters pertaining to their employment. Meetings are held with staff at least every 2 months to discuss issues in dispute.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties, recommends that the Company recognises the Union's right to represent the employees in its membership.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
10th November, 2003______________________
CON/MB.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.