FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION & SKILLS - AND - SIPTU IFUT INTO TUI ASTI DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Variation to the terms of enhanced redundancy payments to Public Servants
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between the employer and Unions in relation to provisions of the Agreement on Enhanced Redundancy Payments to Public Servants. The Unions are seeking that the provision of the agreement that precludes public servants being re-employed in the public service for a period of two years be removed. The Union contends that such a provision will detrimental effect on the careers of Lectures, Teachers and Researchers especially in circumstances where the redundancies are compulsory in nature. Management's position is that removing the restriction on re-entry would be contrary to the key objectives of the Agreement and would have serious cost implications for the Public Service.
The dispute was not 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 matter was referred to the Labour Court on 28th February, 2013 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 4th June 2013
UNION'S ARGUMENT:
3 1 The re-employment restriction is extremely unfair and has a negative effect on the career progression of the employees in question, especially in circumstances where the redundancies are compulsory in nature. In any event the agreement provides that it may be altered if ncessary in meeing the needs of certain sectors of the public service. The Unions are seeking that this is done in the education sector for those made compulsorily redundant.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENT:
4 1 This agreement is in place to reduce the cost of the public sector pay bill. Employees cannot avail of ex gratia redundancy payments in addition to statutory entitlements and expect to be re-employed immediately. This would be contrary to the main objectives of the agreement which were to achieve the required savings. In any event there are no re-employment restrictions if those made redundant opt for statutory entitlements only, the restrictions exist only in circumstances where ex gratia payments have been made.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court recognises a difference in the circumstances of those who volunteer for redundancy and those who are made compulsorily redundant. In the application of the restriction on redeployment in the public service this distinction could be taken into account.
The Court recommends that the parties enter into further discussions with a view to exploring the possibility of providing some modification of the restriction in the case of those who are made redundant compulsorily without the prospect of further or successive engagement.
If agreement is not reached the matter may be referred back to the Court.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
21st June 2013______________________
AHChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.