FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BCD TRAVEL - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Redundancy terms.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns a claim for enhanced redundancy for seven workers. 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 22nd March, 2013, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 30th May, 2013.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The Workers gave the Company many years of loyal and dedicated service.
2 The Company is part of a very profitable international group of companies.
3 The Workers should receive a generous enhanced redundancy payment.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The Company did everything it could to retain the Workers in employment.
2 The norm in the Company is for the payment of statutory redundancy payments only.
3. The Company cannot afford to pay any ex-gratia redundancy payments to the Workers.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court finds that there is merit in the Union's claim.
Accordingly the Court recommends that the Company, in full and final settlement of this dispute, increase the severance terms on offer to two weeks' pay per year of service in addition to statutory redundancy payments.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
5th June, 2013______________________
JMcCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.