FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : CONNACHT GOLD - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Redundancy terms.
BACKGROUND:
2. Connacht Gold is a large multi-purpose cooperative engaged in a wide range of activities including dairy processing, liquid milk distribution, animal feed milling, retail stores. livestock marketing, meat products, wool trading and timber sawmilling. It employs 550 people directly and provides jobs for many others in transport, distribution and forestry.
The dispute before the Court concerns the redundancy package which should be payable to a number of employees being made redundant as part of a current restructuring programme.
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 15th December, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 8th March, 2005.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The Union are seeking the application of the Shannonside redundancy agreement, (Shannonside is part of Connacht Gold) to all employees currently being made redundant. The Shannonside formula is higher than that currently on offer.
2.The Union has facilitated the Company by reaching agreements on transfers, new working hours etc., and expect that there will be a harmonisation of the terms of redundancy within the various areas of Connacht Gold.
SOCIETY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.Only two people in Shannonside are being made redundant as part of the current programme. It is unreasonable of the Union to seek to force a payment that applies to a minority of employees to all employees in the Society.
2. In the interests of honouring previous agreements the Society is prepared to red circle existing Shannonside employees and to maintain the package recommended previously by the Labour Court.
3. The current package on offer is excellent and is well in line with other packages being paid in the general region.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Union based its claim on the fact that one of the amalgamating employments making up Connacht Gold had an agreed redundancy in excess of that applicable in the Company generally. In the Court's view this does not provide a sufficiently sound basis upon which to recommend that the claim be conceded.
The Court notes that the changes in the level of statutory redundancy implemented as part of the terms of Sustaining Progress were not intended to increase costs to the employers nor were they intended to result in savings on pre-existing agreements. On this principle the full benefit of the additional redundancy rebate should accrue to the employees.
In the case of employees of the former Shannonside Milk Products, the agreement applicable to that employment should be applied on a red-circled basis. This formula should also be enhanced so as to reflect the benefit of the additional rebate.
The Court further recommends that the parties should now commence negotiations on a new harmonised redundancy agreement to apply throughout the Company in respect of all future redundancies.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
24th March, 2005______________________
MG.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.