FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 32, INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1946 PARTIES : O' MALLEY CONSTRUCTION CO LTD - AND - BUILDING AND ALLIED TRADES UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Construction Industry Registered Employment Agreement - Wages and Conditions of Employment.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company engaged sub-contractors for brickwork at its Bloomfield Road site, however some of the bricklayers were under the impression that they were direct employees of the Company and therefore were compliant with Section 10 of the Registered Employment Agreement (REA). On investigation the Union discovered that one of the sub-contractors was non-compliant with the REA and this was brought to the attention of the Company. The sub-contractor at the centre of the dispute was removed from the site within a week.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 9th November, 2007. The following is the Court's Decision:-
DECISION:
The Court is aware that labour-only subcontracting has been a source of considerable industrial unrest in the Construction Industry. Against that background an Agreement was concluded in the late 1990's which was intended to regulate the circumstances in which sub-contractors could be engaged and which would protect the legitimate interests of both workers and employers. That agreement was itself a source of contention and its registration was delayed by litigation over many years.
The Agreement has now been registered by the Court as Clause 10 of the REA. The Court regards it as imperative, in the interests of orderly industrial relations, that both sides of the Industry strictly adhere to both the spirit and the letter of what they agreed. In that regard principal contractors in the industry are seriously obligated to ensure that the sub-contractors which they engage practically demonstrate that they are approved sub-contractors within the criteria set out at Clause 10 of the REA.
For its part the Court takes seriously its duty, under Section 32 of the Act, to ensure that all parties adhere to their legally-binding obligations under the Agreement. Accordingly, where necessary the Court will use the full powers available to it under that Section so as to ensure that those obligations are fulfilled.
The Complaint.
In this case it is clear to the Court that the sub-contractor giving rise to this complaint was not observing the terms of the REA in respect of its employees. It was not, therefore, an approved sub-contractor as that term is defined by Clause 10 of the REA. On that basis the Court must hold that the Union's complaint is well-founded. It is equally clear, however, that shortly after it became aware of the complaints against the sub-contractor O'Malley Construction Co. Ltd. terminated the engagement of the sub-contractor.
In these circumstances there is no necessity for the Court to make any further order in this case other than to record that the complaint is well-founded.
The Union raised a number of residual issues relating to the alleged default of the sub-contractor to discharge pay- related liabilities towards its former employees. The Union asserted that the principal contractor should make good such default. In the Court's view these matters are of an industrial relations nature and do not come within the scope of the current complaint under Section 32 of the Act. If they are to be pursued it should be through the normal agreed industrial relations procedures of the Industry.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
24th December, 2007.______________________
JF.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.