LCR19154

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/07/652

RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR19154

(CCa-047624-vr-06)

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
S2(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2001,
AS AMENDED BY THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS(MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT, 2004

PARTIES :

COLSO ENTERPRISES LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY MCNULTY BOYLAN + PARTNERS SOLICITORS)

- AND -

SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)

DIVISION :

Chairman: Ms Jenkinson
Employer Member: Mr Grier
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu

SUBJECT:
1. Referral from the Labour Relations Commission under The Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2001, as Amended by The Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2004.

BACKGROUND:

2. Colso Enterprises Limited carry on the business of warehousing, cold storage and distribution depot in which goods are stored and distributed on behalf of a variety of clients.

In October 2006 the Union took into membership a number of the Company's employees who expressed grievances in relation to a wide range of issues on pay and conditions. The Union wrote twice in October and November to the Company seeking a meeting but received no response.

Following a meeting with the Advisory Service of the Labour Relations Commission in December 2006 the Union claimed that no progress was made. In February 2007 the Company wrote to the Advisory Officer stating that all matters had been settled directly with the staff.

The Employees informed the Union that all matters had not been settled and a further meeting was arranged with the Advisory Service. This meeting took place on 17th August, 2007. A number of issues were resolved including the application of National Wage Agreements, payment of double time for Sunday working and treble time for Public Holiday hours and overtime rates.

As no agreement could be reached on the remaining issues the matter was referred to the Labour Court on the 20th August, 2007, in accordance with Section 2(1) of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2001, as amended by the Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2004. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 10th January, 2008

RECOMMENDATION:

This dispute was referred to the Court pursuant to Section 2 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2001, as amended (the Act). In accordance with Section 3 of the Act the Court dealt with a preliminary matter to determine if the conditions precedent to its jurisdiction specified at Section 2(1) of the Act have been met.

Section 2(1)(a) of the Act provides as follows: -

2.-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Industrial Relations Acts, 1946 to 1990, at the request of a trade union or excepted body, the Court may investigate a trade dispute where the Court is satisfied that –
- (a) it is not the practice of the employer to engage in collective bargaining negotiations in respect of the grade, group or category of workers who are party to the trade dispute and the internal dispute resolution procedures (if any) normally used by the parties concerned have failed to resolve this dispute,

The Employer made it clear that it has no difficulty engaging in collective bargaining negotiations with SIPTU and is prepared to recognise SIPTU as representatives of its members employed by the Company. The Employer agreed to concede a number of the claims submitted by the Union and was willing to enter into negotiations on the outstanding items. The Company confirmed its position in a letter the Court, copied to the Union, dated 1st February 2008. In these circumstances it is clear to the Court that the condition specified in Section 2(1) of the Act has not been met in this case.

Accordingly the Court has no jurisdiction to embark upon an investigation of the substantive dispute.

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court

Caroline Jenkinson
19th February 2008______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.