FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MULLINGAR CONGRESS INFORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT CENTRE - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Enhanced redundancy payments
BACKGROUND:
2. The Congress Information and Development Centre (the Centre) was set up in Mullingar with the assistance of FAS in the mid-1990s and was similar to a Community Enterprise (CE) scheme. The case involves severance entitlements of the Co-ordinator and Assistant Co-ordinator of the Centre who were made redundant on the 30th September, 2007. The Union is seeking enhanced terms of 3.35 weeks' pay per year for all service in addition to statutory entitlements. Both workers had been employed as CE participants with the Centre before being appointed as Co-ordinator and Assistant Co-ordinator. When they were made redundant in September, 2007, the Co-ordinator was offered the enhanced terms for her time as Co-ordinator (8.23 years) but not for her time as CE participant (1.26 years). The Assistant Co-ordinator was offered statutory entitlements only (his service was 0.75 years as Assistant and 3.69 years as CE participant. The Centre does not dispute the claim but its case is that it does not have the money and that the responsibility lies with FAS from where all funding comes.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference took place. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 27th February, 2009, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 1st October, 2009, in Mullingar.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers are entitled to be paid enhanced redundancy for all their time with the Centre as there was no break in service and they continued to be funded by FAS. The CE Supervisors Redundancy package states that all time will be taken into account when calculating the enhanced package.
CENTRE'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The claim was the subject of several meetings between the Centre, the Union and FAS. Terms and conditions for the positions were determined and funded by FAS. The Centre only acted as a conduit for the employment and payment of the workers concerned.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns a claim for enhanced redundancy payments for two workers employed as (i) Co-ordinator and (ii) Assistant Co-ordinator. Prior to being offered the positions on the Jobs Club, the claimants had been employed on a CE scheme.
The Union sought the application of the nationally agree CE Supervisors redundancy package – 3.35 weeks' pay per year of service plus statutory redundancy.
In September, 2007, the Club ceased and FÁS funded an enhanced redundancy package but only for the period of employment that the claimants were employed by the Jobs Club and not for their service on the CE scheme. The latter was recognised for statutory redundancy only. Management held the view that it had no liability and the terms and conditions were determined and funded by FÁS and that it had no resources to meet the claim.
Having considered the submission of both parties the Court is of the view as it is accepted by both parties that the appropriate redundancy payment applicable on the termination of the workers employment is 3.35 weeks' pay per year of service plus statutory redundancy, then that package should be applicable to all reckonable years of service. Therefore, the Court recommends concession of the claim.
In order to implement the Recommendation, the parties should, if necessary, both approach FÁS with a view to securing the necessary funding.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
12th October, 2009______________________
CONDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.