FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : LISHEEN MINE LTD (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Bonus Scheme.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Lisheen Mine is a wholly owned subsidiary of Anglo Base Metals, which is a division of Anglo American plc. The Company currently employs 375 people and some 60 contractors in the extraction of ore from its underground mine.
The case before the Court concerns a claim by the Unions for changes to the underground bonus scheme.
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 5th June, 2008, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 15th October, 2008.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Approximately 2 years ago the Company agreed to increase the bonus of both Fitters and Mechanics to 90% if the TEEU agreed not to make a claim to increase the Electricians bonus. The Electricians agreed not to make a relativity claim with the Fitters and Mechanics.
2. The Company subsequently changed their view and requested TEEU to also get agreement with SIPTU. This was not possible.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company proposal to the TEEU and SIPTU is to change the bonus payments structure to resolve all current outstanding grievances and is conditional on agreement that no knock-on relativity claims would follow. SIPTU representatives are unable to give that assurance.
2. The Company believes that if it moves to change the bonus structure without full agreement from both unions, a relativity claim will immediately follow.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is noted that the issue of adjustment of the bonus for members of TEEU has been largely agreed at local level and that the residual dispute relates to the possibility of consequential claims by other groups.
The Court recommends that in the circumstances the agreement reached with TEEU should be implemented. It should be understood that the settlement in that case was based on its own merits. Concessions of the TEEU claim should not be relied upon or quoted by any other group for the purpose of advancing a claim for adjustment in bonus arrangements or otherwise.
Furthermore, the Court strongly recommends that any industrial relations issue or dispute arising in the employment should be processed through normal industrial relations procedures, including reference of the issue to the LRC and the Court. No form of industrial action or interference with normal working should take place until such procedures have been used and exhausted.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
30th October, 2008.______________________
MG.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.