FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : COMMISSIONERS OF IRISH LIGHTS - AND - UNITE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Pay adjustment.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute arose from the Employer's proposals to reduce costs in light of reductions in its funding. 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 6th May, 2014, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 12th June, 2014.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The volume of work carried out by the Workers has significantly increased.
2 The Employer has acted in breach of agreements and dispute resolution procedures.
3 The Employer should restore the Workers' pay and terms and conditions.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The Employer has managed to agree substantial work practice changes and a pay adjustment with the vast majority of our staff.
2 This group of workers, however, refused to agree to these changes despite being the least affected.
3. These proposals are reasonable and necessary.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties it is clear that Unions representing 90% of the CIL employees accepted the LRC proposal in issue.
In these circumstances the CIL had no viable alternative but to implement those proposals in respect of all employees.
Accordingly, the Court does not recommend concession of the Union’s claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
26th June, 2014______________________
JMcCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.