FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : AER LINGUS - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Carberry Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Surplus pilots and related issues
BACKGROUND:
2. The parties attended a conciliation conference at the Labour Relations Commission. As they did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 19th of April, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 19th and 20th of April, 2004. The following is the Court's recommendation:
RECOMMENDATION:
- Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Court recommends as follows:
- Claimed Surplus of Pilots.
- There is significant disagreement between the parties as to the extent, if any, to which the current number of pilots exceed the needs of the Company. The Court recommends that this issue be addressed in a two stage process involving:-
- A first phase consisting of an assessment by an agreed independent party of the appropriate complement of pilots having regard to the operational needs of the Airline and the need to adhere to all relevant collective agreements.A second phase consisting of a process of negotiation, facilitated by an agreed independent party, by which any surplus identified in the first phase will be addressed.
- The first phase should be given a target of ten working days and the full process should be completed by the end of May, 2004. Any outstanding issues should at that stage be referred back to the Court for a definitive recommendation.
- Preference Bidding System
The Court notes that a steering committee has been established to expedite the introduction of the Preference Bidding System. The Court also notes that the Union considers it appropriate that an independent chairperson be appointed to this steering group. The Court recommends that, in the exceptional circumstances of this case, the Union’s request be acceded to. Accordingly, the Court recommends that a chairperson be appointed by agreement between the parties and, in default of agreement, on the nomination of the Court.
Part-Time Work Agreement.
An arrangement on part-time work for pilots should be implemented in the terms agreed between the parties and in a manner which complies with the Company’s statutory obligations pursuant to the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act, 2001.
Normal Working.
The parties should maintain normal working, and all forms of industrial or coercive action should be suspended for the duration of this process. Disciplinary procedures initiated against individual pilots in respect of their refusal to accept redeployment should, likewise, be suspended during this period.
It is noted that the parties have asked the Court to give its interpretation of their agreement on training pursuant to section 7 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. Pending the Court’s decision in this matter, the training course scheduled to commence on Monday 26th April, 2004, should proceed without the involvement of Captains.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
20th April, 2004______________________
CONChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.