FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BORD NA GCON/IRISH GREYHOUND BOARD (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Ex-gratia lump sum on retirement.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union's claim is on behalf of 12 part-time workers and is for an ex gratia payment on retirement. At present, the workers would only receive statutory entitlements when they retire. The Union is seeking an ex-gratia payment of €1,300 per year of service. The Board, in a letter to the Union dated 4th of July, 2003, stated"that the financial implications of this request are prohibitive. Accordingly, the Board is unable to accede to your request in this matter".
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference took place. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 10th of November, 2003, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 4th of March, 2004.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. A new TOTE system was introduced in 2004 at the 2 Dublin Tracks (Shelbourne Park and Harold's Cross) resulting in massive increases in TOTE turnover. The Board also had a strong financial performance in 2003.
2. The average weekly earnings for the workers is €112. They do not have a pension scheme or a sick-pay scheme unlike other staff employed by the Board who have both.
3. The workers concerned are long-serving employees (20 to 37 years) who have contributed to the success of the Board.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In June 1993 the Board entered into an agreement with the Union which included the following... "Normal retirement age for part-time tote staff be 65". There was no mention of a pension being provided by the Board for tote staff in that agreement.
2. The average hourly rate of pay of €12.25 is almost double the present statutory minimum hourly rate. The Board has paid all phases of the National Agreements.
3. The Board must consider the serious financial ramifications of giving a once off lump sum in lieu of membership of a pension scheme. The claim, if conceded, would lead to substantial knock-on claims.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court notes that the issue of a pension scheme was raised by the Union on a number of occasions over the years. However, because of the difficult financial state of the industry, this claim was not pursued.
While there are now proposals to introduce such a scheme, these employees will not benefit.
It is the Court's view that employees who take into consideration the financial difficulties being encountered by Companies, by not processing claims, should not lose out when the situation improves.
While accepting that the ongoing financial situation continues to require attention, the Company has made progress and achieved significant success in its restructuring.
The Court is surprised that no provision appears to have been made to deal with this claim when drawing up the restructuring plans.
The Court notes the Union's acceptance that to provide a pension scheme with retrospection for years of service would be too costly for the employer.
Given the history of the claim and its background above, the Court finds merit in the Union case for an ex-gratia payment.
However, the Court recommends that the parties meet to agree the level of ex-gratia payments that meets both parties requirements, with discussions to be completed within four weeks of this recommendation. If they fail to reach an agreement the Court will, on request, make a definitive recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
24th March, 2004______________________
CON/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.