FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : IBM IRELAND LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY ARTHUR COX SOLICITORS) - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation R-039159-Ir-05/Tb
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker joined International Business Machines (IBM) in 1971 as a Trainee Customer Engineer and rose through the grades until finally reaching the position of Global Services Business Controls Manager. In 2005 the Worker successfully applied for voluntary redundancy and on the 25th August his employment ended under the terms of the agreement. IBM Management considered they had paid in full the agreed amount of the severance package and were surprised to learn that the ex-Worker was seeking a 3.5% salary increase which was granted in September 2005 but back-dated to 1st July, 2005.
The matter was referred by the Worker to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 16th June 2006 the Rights Commissioner issued his recommendation as follows:
" It is clear that the claimant accepted the contents of the letter of the 31st. of May, 2005 which outlined the redundancy arrangements and package which would apply to him. He signed a confirmation docket accepting these arrangements on the 7th. of June, 2005.
As the company have honoured the arrangements agreed by both parties I do not recommend in favour of the claimant."
- On the 9th August, 2007 the Worker referred the issue to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 9th January, 2008.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Due to the hard work and effort of the Worker during 2004 he received a good performance rating, therefore he was entitled to be awarded the 3.5% Salary Improvement Programme (SIP) in July 2005, the fact that the announcement was delayed until 1st September 2005 should have no impact on whether or not he receives his due.
- 2. IBM's SIP is not contingent upon continuing employment, it is a stand alone entitlement based on a performance rating during January every year.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. On 1st September the Company exercised its discretion to award pay increases to its then current employees. Only those employed were eligible for the award.
2. The Worker was well compensated for the voluntary termination of his employment. He cannot now assert an entitlement to a pay rise that was awarded and confined to staff still in employment at the date it was announced. There was no injustice whatsoever done to the Worker in this case.
DECISION:
Having considered the oral and written submissions of the parties, the Court is of the view that the appellant has not established a case for the salary increase to be paid to him.
Accordingly the Court rejects the appeal and upholds the Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
16th. January, 2008______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.