FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : SOUTH WEST DOCTORS ON CALL LIMITED, TRADING AS SOUTHDOC - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY INDEPENDENT WORKERS' UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Introduction of pension or retirement gratuity scheme
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the Worker's claim for the introduction of a pension or gratuity scheme. The Worker referred this case to the Labour Court on 29th November, 2013, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation. A letter was received from IBEC on behalf of the Employer stating that they did not recognise the Union involved for collective bargaining purposes and they would not be attending this hearing. A Labour Court hearing took place on 12th March, 2014.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Worker has been employed with the Company since 2001 and some employees of the Company are members of a pension scheme while the Worker is denied participation in a Company pension or retirement gratuity scheme.
RECOMMENDATION:
The case came before the Court under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Acts 1946-2012. The Employer did not attend the hearing on the grounds that it did not recognise the Union involved for collective bargaining purposes.
Having considered the Union’s submissions in the case the Court notes that another Union is recognised by the Company for collective bargaining purposes.
The Court understands that Trade Union has identified a number of priority issues that it is pursuing in the context of the Company’s financial position.
The Court also notes that the issue of superannuation benefits has been addressed by the Court in a Recommendation issued in 2004.
In all of the circumstances of this case, the Court is of the view that it would be improper for it to interfere with the priorities set by the staff for their Trade Union in it's discussions with the Employer.
Accordingly, the Court does not recommend concession of the claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
3rd April, 2014______________________
CO'RDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Clodagh O'Reilly, Court Secretary.