LCR20037

SUBJECT:
1. Redundancy


BACKGROUND:

2. The case before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of its members previously employed at the Grafton Street, Dublin branch of Laura Ashley in relation to an enhanced redundancy package. The fifteen workers were made redundant when the store closed its doors in October 2010 and have continued to carry out industrial action at the former store from that time to the present date. The Union is seeking an enhanced redundancy package of five weeks pay per year of service inclusive of statutory entitlements, but the Company states that it is not in a financial position to pay anything above statutory entitlements. The dispute could not be resolved at local level and no agreement was reached between the parties.

On the 9th February, 2011 the Union referred the issue to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on 25th March, 2011. The Employer did not attend and was not represented at the hearing however they did send a letter to the Court outlining their position.



UNION'S ARGUMENTS:


3. 1. The Union contends that the Employer has a moral obligation to provide an honourable and just redundancy package to its employees.

2.The Union maintains that the Employer is a highly profitable Company. It is therefore unacceptable for the Employer to cite financial losses as a reason for offering solely statutory redundancy payments given the significant profits generated during more favourable economic times for the retail sector.

3.It is inappropriate for the Employer to compare the employees concerned in this claim to employees outside of the jurisdiction. The Union further contends that the Employer has an obligation to operate within the industry customs and practices of the jurisdiction in which it is operating.


EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS

4. 1. The Employer has suffered a significant financial loss as a result of the downturn in the economy. The closure of the Grafton Street store was a direct effect of this loss.

2. The Employer is not in a financial position to offer a redundancy package in excess of statutory entitlements.

3.The Employer has made every effort to decrease the effects of the redundancies including the creation of additional roles in remaining stores and the transferring of staff to existing vacancies within the Company.










RECOMMENDATION:

The Court notes that the Employer decided not to attend the hearing but instead submitted a letter setting out its position. The Court took this letter along with the Union’s submissions into account in arriving at this Recommendation.

From the information available to it the Court notes that this is an exceptional case and accordingly and on a without precedent basis recommends that the Employer pay to the workers concerned an enhanced redundancy package of two weeks pay per year of service in addition to their statutory entitlements.

The Court so recommends.



Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Brendan Hayes
5th April 2011______________________
SCDeputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.