INT142

In this case the Court is asked to interpret the term “new entrants” as it appears in a Collective Agreement entered into between the parties in February 2010, known as the CRP Agreement. The agreement provided for reduced rates of pay for new entrants.

The term is not defined by the agreement nor is there any evidence to indicate that the meaning to be ascribed to the term was addressed by the parties in the course of the negotiations leading to the conclusion of the agreement.

The issue has come before the Court in the context of a dispute as to whether three members of SIPTU, who were employed by the Authority on a succession of fixed term contracts, the first of which was concluded in 2008, are properly classified as new entrants within the meaning of the CRP Agreement. These employees had their fixed-term employment renewed after the conclusion of the Agreement. However, in or about June 2012 they were given contracts of indefinite duration. It is common case between the parties that these contracts of indefinite duration were granted pursuant to an entitlement that these employees had accrued under the Protection of Employees (Fixed Term Work) Act 2003.

Interpretation

The Court interprets the term “new entrant” as meaning a person whose continuous reckonable service with the Authority commenced after the date on which the CRP Agreement was concluded. In this case, in awarding the employees contracts of indefinite duration in June 2012, pursuant to the Protection of Employees (Fixed Terms Work) Act 2003, the Authority acknowledged that these employees had accrued four years continuous service by that date. Consequently they could not be regarded as new entrants as the term is interpreted by the Court.



Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Kevin Duffy
21st November 2014______________________
SCChairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.