FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : INTERNATIONAL PAPER (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Redundancies.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is part of a multinational group and manufactures cardboard packaging. It is located in Ashbourne, Co Meath.
As part of a restructuring programme the Company wishes to implement 8 redundancies and has offered 4.5 weeks pay per year of service plus the statutory entitlement and subject to a cap of eighteen months pay. The Company entered into discussions with the Union in May 2004, seeking volunteers for redundancy, but the Union opposed the proposals. As there were insufficient volunteers to meet the Company's requirements the Company proposed to select for redundancy based on a skills rating system.
A consensus could not be reached on even how to address the need for redundancies, or the terms of the package on offer, or the selection criteria proposed by the Company.
The dispute was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission held on the 11th April 2005. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 19th April, 2005, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 16th June, 2005.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The Company has failed to engage in discussions with the Union in any meaningful way.
2.The introduction of a 'cap' is discriminatory against those who have long service with the Company.
3. The Union believe that the Company is a profit making Company and that the market for the Company's products is not in decline.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company has had meetings with the Union at both Company and LRC level but have failed to reach agreement.
2. The redundancy terms on offer are in line with the best available.
3. The reduction of costs is vital to the Company's ability to remain competitive and maintain production volumes at Ashbourne.
RECOMMENDATION:
Given the nature of the redundancies in question, the Court recommends the following amendments to the Company's last position:-
a) The redundancies should be voluntary as far as possible, subject to the retention of key skills as deemed necessary. In the case of insufficient volunteers, subsequent selection should be on the basis of last in first out, again subject to retention of key skills where necessary
b) the upper cap of 18 months' pay should be removed in the calculation of 4 1/2 weeks pay p.y.o.s. plus statutory entitlements.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
25th July, 2005______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.