FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : DIVINE WORLD MISSIONARIES (REPRESENTED BY MR S DIXON B.L. INSTRUCTED BY DERMOT FLANAGAN SOLICITORS) - AND - 2 WORKERS (REPRESENTED BY MS C EGAN B.L. INSTRUCTED BY BYRNE CAROLAN CUNNINGHAM SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Dispute regarding the payment of a gratuity on retirement.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case concerns a dispute between two former employees of the Divine World Missionaries who are claiming the long established retirement gratuity of one weeks' pay per year of service. The workers had both worked for the employer for in excess of 40 years, and although one of the workers is now deceased, his sister (the other employee) is also pursuing the claim for her deceased brother as she is the executor of his estate.
The employer's position is that gratuities are at the discretion of its board and that while a gratuity was paid, it was not at the level expected due to financial constraints and improvements to the pension fund.
On the 25th August 2010, the workers referred the dispute 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 14th March 2012.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. It is a long established custom and practice within the employment that retirement gratuities are paid at the rate of one weeks' pay per year of service. It is unacceptable that the employer would apply these terms to some workers and unilaterally decide not to apply them to others.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. There is no contractual obligation to apply the retirement gratuity as claimed. Unfortunately due to the financial circumstances of the employer it was unable to apply the expected level of payment but did apply a reduced gratuity. In addition, there were also significant
RECOMMENDATION:
This case comes before the Court pursuant to Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1946-1990.
The Court has carefully considered the submissions of both parties to the dispute.
The Court finds that the second named complainant passed away before the complaint came on for hearing. The Court finds that the provisions of Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 require it to consider the issues in dispute and issue a recommendation.
The Court finds that the custom and practice in the employment, over a prolonged period of time was for retiring employees to receive a severance payment equivalent to one weeks' pay for each year of service with the employer. The Court finds that no good reason for not making a similar payment in this case was advanced by the respondent.
Accordingly, the Court recommends that the respondent pay the complainant the claimed severance payment.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
17th April, 2012.______________________
AH.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.