FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 33(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1946 PARTIES : I.U.S./SMC GROUP - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Rate of Pay
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker was employed as an overhead linesman with Integrated Utility Services from July 2004 until June 2007. It was brought to his attention by his Union Representative that his rate of pay should be covered by the Construction Industry Registered Employment Agreement. A meeting with Management in order to discuss the issue took place but no agreement could be found.
The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation on the 28th November, 2007 . On the 14th January, 2008, the Rights Commissioner issued his Recommendation as follows-:
"There is a clear difference between the Respondent and the Claimant on rates of pay. The fundamental issue is : is the Claimant covered by the Registered Agreement? The question of whether a worker is covered by the Registered Agreement is one for consideration under Section 33(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1946 by the Labour Court and is not for consideration by a Rights Commissioner under these Statutes".
On the 4th February, 2008 the issue was referred to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 33(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1946. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 3rd April, 2008.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Worker was employed by Integrated Utility Services (I.U.S.) which is owned by the South Midland Construction Company Limited Group (S.M.C. Group) which is a member of the Construction Industry Federation (CIF) and therefore is bound by the Registered Employment Agreement of the Construction Industry Wages and Conditions (REA).
2. The ESB as clients ensure that all contractors comply with all relevant legislation which would include the REA.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. I.U.S. Limited is a subcontractor of the ESB and is employed on a fixed price 3 year contract. The REA does not apply to the ESB and the ESB is not a member of the CIF.
2. The REA applies only to Building Firms, IUS is not a building firm and the Worker was employed as an overhead linesman a capacity not covered by the REA.
DECISION:
The Court finds that the Claimant is not a person to whom the Registered Employment Agreement for the Construction Industry applies and so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
17th April 2008______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.