FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MID-WESTERN LIFT SERVICES LIMITED TRADING AS MID-WESTERN LIFTS - AND - TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. 1. Breach of Company/Union Agreement 2. Redundancy Package.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is an indigenous designer, supplier and installer of lifts and escalators with its head office in Limerick and with sister Companies based both in Belfast and Dublin. The Union claim that the 2006 Company / Union Agreement was breached by the continued retention of sub-contractors in Dublin while direct employees are offered redundancy the quantum of which is also in dispute.
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 15th April, 2009, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 28th May 2009.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
2. 1. The fact that there are currently four Hungarian sub-contractors working on a project in Dublin when direct employees in Limerick are facing imminent redundancy is a clear breach of the Collective Agreement.
2. To say that there is no transferability between the Limerick and Dublin plants is news to the Union as there are historical cases that Union members are aware of.
3.The redundancy package, in order to be fair and reasonable, would need to have both the following elements, namely six weeks' pay per year of service inclusive of statutory redundancy and to be based on average earnings.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The four Lift Engineers employed on a project in Dublin do not in any way jeopardise jobs in Limerick as the Company employing them, Mid-Western Lifts Ltd, is independent from the Company, Mid-Western Lift Services Ltd, in Limerick.
2. As sales and income have been dropping the Company has made every effort to retain the maximum number of employees in spite of the reduced workload. A 10% salary reduction has been accepted by all managerial, supervisory and clerical staff.
3.Due to the financial state of the Company it means that it is not in a position to pay in excess of the statutory entitlements for redundancy compensation plus two weeks' pay per year of service at a maximum weekly rate of €600.00.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions put forward by the parties, the Court recommends as follows:-
- It is accepted within the Company / Union Agreement that the Dublin and Limerick operations are two separate Companies. In the view of the Court, there is no breach of Clause 4.2 of the Agreement in the Company's proposal to confine the redundancies to the Limerick operation.
- Redundancies should, in the first instance, be voluntary. If insufficient volunteers come forward, the principle of last-in / first-out should apply. In principle, the Company should have the right to retain essential skills.
- The redundancy package should be the statutory redundancy payment plus four weeks' average pay per year of service with no maximum amount imposed on the severance package.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
19th June, 2009______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.