FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : SOUTH TIPPERARY COUNTY COUNCIL - AND - UNITE & SIPTU DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Withdrawal of bonus scheme.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute arose from the Council's proposal to withdraw a bonus payment. 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 29th November, 2013, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 24th January, 2013.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 This bonus payment has been part of the Workers' normal pay since 1959.
2 The Council's unilateral decision to withdraw this bonus payment will have a devastating effect on the Workers' pay and pensions.
3 The same level of productivity will not be maintained if this bonus payment is withdrawn.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 All parties to the Public Service Agreement committed to eliminating work practices that result in unnecessary costs.
2 No other local authority in the State operates such a bonus scheme.
3. Continuation of this bonus scheme will hinder the merging of the local authorities in Tipperary.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court notes that the Council proposes to close the bonus scheme by application of the compensatory formula provided for in the Public Service Agreement in the case of allowances. What is in issue in this case is not an allowance. The Public Service Agreement provides no guidance on the terms that should be applied in the event of a bonus scheme of this nature being discontinued. The scheme is in many respects unique within the Public Sector. In the Court’s view the parties are not constrained by any express provision of the Public Service Agreement in the range or extent of compensatory measures that could be considered if the Council’s objective were to be achieved.
On that basis the Court recommends that the parties should enter into a process of negotiation so as to explore the basis upon which the Council’s proposal could be implemented. These negotiations should commence as soon as practicable after acceptance of this Recommendation and should continue for a period not exceeding eight weeks.
If agreement is not reached outstanding matters may be referred back to the Court.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
4th February, 2014______________________
JMcCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.