FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : M&J GLEESON & CO. - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Redundancy terms, restoration of a pay cut, union recognition and terms and conditions of employment.
BACKGROUND:
2. M&J Gleeson & Co was acquired by the C&C Group in November 2012. SIPTU referred claims on a number of issues including redundancy terms, restoration of a pay cut, union recognition and terms and conditions of employment on behalf of their members from the Employer.
On the 14th August 2013 the Union referred its 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. M&J Gleeson & Co wrote to the Court on the 24th October 2013 declining the request to attend the hearing and setting out it's position on the claims before the Court. The Court replied to their letter on the 25th October 2013 stating that the contents of their letter could only be taken into consideration in the case if a representative of the Company attended the hearing to present their case.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 30th October, 2013. The Employer did not attend the hearing.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
2. 1. SIPTU are recommending that they be recognised as the representatives of the staff in the company, M&J Gleeson & Co, so that progress can be made on the issues of redundancy terms, restoration of a pay cut and terms and conditions of employment.
2. The Union claims that while the Company has held a number of meetings with staff regarding the integration of the organisation, following the transfer of the company to the C&C Group, these were not negotiating forums and therefore could not be described as formal collective bargaining.
3. SIPTU states that while one part of the C&C Group is dealing with the Union on behalf of the members the other part of the same group, M&J Gleeson & Co, refuses to meet the members of the Union.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Union on behalf of its members in M&J Gleeson & Company submitted a number of claims before the Court including a claim for be recognition for negotiating purposes with the Company. The Company did not attend the hearing to present its position to the Court.
Having considered the Union’s submission the Court is of the view that the Company should recognise the Union for the purpose of collective bargaining. The parties should meet at an early date for the purpose of agreeing a framework within which normal industrial relations matters can be co-operatively dealt with and the Company should enter discussions with the Union regarding the matters identified in its submission. Due to the impending redundancy situation the Court recommends that these discussions should commence without delay.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
CR______________________
4th November, 2013.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.