FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BANAGHER CONCRETE - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Termination of entry into Pension Scheme.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company was established in 1976 in Banagher, Co. Offaly. The main business of the Company is the production and supply of materials to the construction industry. It currently employs two hundred and sixty workers.
The Company operates the Construction Industry (CIF) Pension and Sick Pay Scheme which is available to employees with two years continuous service. In 1999, following negotiations on pay, the Company states that it was made clear to the Union that in order to fund the pay increase, entrance to the pension scheme would have to be deferred indefinitely. The Union states that during the negotiations there was no reference made to the deferral of the scheme. The dispute before the Court is a claim by the Union for the reinstatement of the CIF Pension and Sick Pay Scheme.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 19th May, 2003, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 9th December 2003, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
The Company made an offer at conciliation that all employees with a minimum of two years continuous service as at January, 1999, could join the scheme in January, 2004 and thereafter employees with a minimum of five years continuous service could join the scheme in January, 2005. The offer was rejected by the Union.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. During the negotiations there was no reference made to the deferral of the CIF Pension and Sick Pay Scheme.
2. The effect of such an arrangement would have profound consequences for members employed by the Company.
3. All employees who have been excluded from the benefits of the CIF Pension and Sick Pay Scheme should now be included and all retrospection paid from the date they became eligible for the scheme.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. During the negotiations on pay it was made clear to the Union, that in order to fund the increase, entrance to the pension scheme would have to be deferred indefinitely.
2. The claim cannot be conceded as the cost of arrears would amount to approximately €150,000 with a knock on effect of an annual cost to the Company of €116,000.
3. The Company's offer should be accepted.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Union seeks the reinstatement of the CIF Pension and Sick Pay Scheme for new entrants who were denied access following negotiations on pay in 1999, which granted increases of 6% over and above the National Wage Agreement. The Company stated to the Court that it was made clear to the Union during negotiations that in order to fund this increase, entrance to the pension scheme would have to be deferred indefinitely. The Union was of the view that no such reference to a deferment was ever made.
The Court is satisfied that the terms of the agreement as outlined in the Company's offer, dated 16th November, 1999 make no reference to the CIF Pension and Sick Pay Scheme. To resolve this dispute the Court recommends that the scheme should be reintroduced in January, 2004 and be made available to those with the requisite two years continuous service.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
9th January, 2004_______________________
GB/BGDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.