FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 57(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1946 PARTIES : POWER RIGHT LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY PENINSULA BUSINESS SERVICES (IRELAND) LIMITED) - AND - NERA DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Determination as to whether company is covered by Security Ero
BACKGROUND:
2. The Issue before the Court concerns a request by the Company for the Court to determine as to whether or not it are bound by the Security Industry Joint Labour Committee and Employment Regulation Order. The Company states that its primary business is the installation of alarms, CCTV and access control panels. It argues Keyholders employed by the Company react to intruder alarms when notified by the monitoring agency and call the garda� if necessary. They are not proactive, as a security guard may be, in preventing an intrusion. The National Employment Rights Agency contends that the Company is covered by the Security Industry JLC and ERO as the Workers concerned perform a range of security or surveillance functions for the purpose of the protection of property.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 21st July, 2010
DECISION:
This matter came before the Court by way of an application by Power Point Ltd (the Applicant) for a decision on whether the Security Industry Joint Labour Committee and the Employment Regulation Order (Security Industry Joint Labour Committee), 2006 [S.I. No. 500 of 2006] operates as respects particular employees of the Applicant. The application was made pursuant to s.57(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1946.
The application arose against the background of an assertion by an Official of the National Employment Rights Authority (NERA) that certain employees of the Applicant come within the scope of the JLCs and the EROs. In these circumstances the Court invited NERA to appear before it and make submissions as alegitimus contradictorin the proceedings.
The point in issue
The ERO applies to security operatives employed in the provision of a security service. The definition of a security service and that of a security operative to which the ERO relates is contained at Part 1 of the Schedule to the Order. It provides as follows: -
- “Workers to whom this Schedule applies
- Security operatives, namely persons employed to provide a security service as described hereunder for contract clients of their employer, and performing one or more of the functions set out hereunder.
Meaning of “security service”:- A service of a security or surveillance nature, the purpose of which is to protect persons and property.
Primary functions of security operatives:- (i) The prevention or detection of theft, loss, embezzlement, misappropriation or concealment of merchandise, money, bonds, stocks, notes or other valuables.
(ii) The prevention or detection of intrusion, unauthorised entry or activity, vandalism or trespass on private property either by physical, electronic or mechanical means.
(iii) The enforcement of rules, regulations and policies related to crime reduction.
BUT EXCLUDING- (i) Workers affected by an Employment Agreement, that is “an agreement relating to the remuneration or the conditions of employment of workers of any class, type or group made between a trade union of workers and an employer or trade union of employers or made at a meeting of a registered joint industrial council between members of the council representative of workers and members of the council representative of employers.” Industrial Relations Act, 1990, Section 46.
(ii) Workers to whom an Employment Regulation Order made as a result of proposals received from another Joint Labour Committee applies.
The Court received extensive submissions on the work performed by key holders employed by the Applicant. These submissions disclose that the key holders are engaged on stand-by and are contacted by the Applicant where an intruder alarm is activated. They travel to the premises in question and if there has been an intrusion on the premises they call the Garda�. If the premises has not been entered they check over the premises and re-set the alarm.
ConclusionBy any construction of the facts it is clear to the Court that the work undertaken by key holders employed by the Applicant involves the prevention or detection of intrusion, unauthorised entry or activity in buildings. It is, therefore, one of the primary functions of a security operative as defined by the ERO. Further the service provided by the Applicant through the key holders is of a security nature the purpose of which is the protection of property.
In these circumstances the Applicant the Court is satisfied that the Applicant and those of its employees who are designated as key holders are covered by the EROSigned on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
9th August, 2010______________________
DNChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.