FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : RWE NPOWER (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - UNITE / TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING & ELECTRICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Redundancy terms.
BACKGROUND:
2. When the Great Northern Brewery facility in Dundalk was decommissioned six Employees of RWE nPower (an on-site service contractor)were made compulsorily redundant with effect from 30th September 2013. In 2008, when news of the closure was first mooted, the Company advised staff that it was Management's intention to mirror the Client Company's redundancey package for its own employees. This assurance resulted in full-co-operation from the Workers and the Company did not suffer any disruption to service despite a reduction in shift patterns, a reduced workforce and reduced wages.
The Company states that it was its intention to mirror the Client Company's severance package but it was always contingent on financial assistance from the Client which was not forthcoming. The package now on offer is not acceptable to the Workers.
The 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 2nd September 2013, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 15th October, 2013.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. A commitment to mirror the client company's redundancy package was freely given and the Company has benefitted from this. It is not acceptable to not now honour the assurance.
2. The Company has never made an argument of inability to pay the severance package promised.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company has offered a very comprehensive package with a suite of support services to its Employees at the Dundalk site.
2. At the time the closure was announced the Company was counting on financial assistance from the Client Company for the severance package. This is now not forthcoming.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has carefully considered the submissions of both parties to this dispute.
The Court notes the respective positions of each party regarding the "commitments" given by the Company's representatives to the workers in 2008 regarding the level of redundancy payments that would apply in the event of the termination of the relevant commercial contract with the Client Company. The Court takes the view that those "commitments" distinguish this case from others that might arise in such circumstances and has developed its Recommendation in that context.
Accordingly, in the specific circumstances that apply in this case, the Court recommends that the dispute between the parties be settled on the following terms:-
Severance Payment
The Court recommends that the Company improve its offer to provide for the following:-1. Six weeks' pay per year of service. The Court recommends the removal of the 60-week ceiling proposed by the Company.
Wind-down Payment2. The wind- down payment proposed at the meeting of the 22nd January 2013 to apply.
Additional Enhanced Payment
3. An enhanced severance payment based on service as follows:
a. Years Payment
0-2 €4,000
2-5 €9,500
5-10 €12,500
10-15 €15,500
15+ €20,500
Education Grant
4. The Court recommends that the Company provide an education grant of up to €2,000 vouched for educational purposes with a recognised educational institute. Applications for access to this fund should be open to staff for a period of three months from the date of this Recommendation.
General
The Court recommends that all other aspects of the Company's offer continue unamended.
The Court recommends that the Workers concerned accept the Company's offer as amended above in full and final settlement of this dispute.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
19th November, 2013______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.