FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BRINKS ALLIED LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY PENINSULA BUSINESS SERVICES) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Change In Work Practices Disturbance/ Relocation Loss Of Earnings Overtime Allocation Restructuring/ Rationalisation Conditions Of Employment Hours Of Work Manning Levels/ Staffing Loss Of Overtime Earnings.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute arose from the Company's proposal to implement various changes in an attempt to reduce costs. This 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 16th March, 2011, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 24th June, 2011.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The Company is required to provide a more cost-effective service to its clients.
2 The Company's priority has been to avoid redundancies while also maintaining contracted hours.
3 In these circumstances, it is reasonable for the Company to relocate staff to other locations.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The proposed changes would have serious implications for the terms and conditions of employment of staff.
2 The proposed changes would reduce regular rostered overtime.
3. The staff should be compensated in accordance with agreed compensation arrangements.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns outstanding issues as a result of contract negotiations between Brinks Ireland Limited and Jones Lang LaSalle. In March 2010 Jones Lang LaSalle were contracted by Intel Global Facility Management to manageinter aliasecurity operations at the plant. Prior to that in March 2009, Brinks Ireland Limited had been awarded a 12-month contract to carry out security operations at the Intel site.
Having considered the submissions of both sides it emerged from the hearing that due to the detailed complexities of the issues involved there is a requirement for further refinement of the issues and in that context the Court recommends that an Independent Arbitrator should be appointed to assist the parties to bring the matter to a final resolution.
The Court recommends that the agreed Independent Arbitrator, Mr. Tom Wall, should be appointed to issue a Determination, binding on both parties, on the outstanding issues in dispute as presented to the Court. The Court recommends that this exercise should be completed within four weeks of the date of this Recommendation.
The previous Determination which Mr. Wall completed on 30th October 2009, entitled“Determination of Issues in Dispute Between Brinks Ireland and SIPTU concerning The Terms and Conditions of Employment of Staff Employed on Intel Security”should form the background to this dispute.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
24th June, 2011______________________
JMcCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.