FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : CORK ASSOCIATION FOR AUTISM - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Withdrawal of paid maternity leave without agreement.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Claimant has been employed by the Association for over twelve years which is funded through Section 39 as a Voluntary Organisation. She applied for paid maternity leave in November 2013 but her application was rejected.
In line with the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Legislation of 2009 support grants were cut and cost saving measures were sought by Management in order to find efficiencies. Management proposed to end the payment of salary increments to staff but after discussions with the Union this proposal was withdrawn. A unilateral decision was later then taken by Management to suspend paid maternity leave and this decision is at the kernel of this dispute.
On the 12th June, 2014 the Union referred the issue to the Labour Court, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 31st October, 2014.
The Union agreed to be bound by the Labour Court’s Recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The decision to cease maternity leave payment was taken without any consultation or agreement with the Union.
2.In so doing the employer has introduced a cost saving measure which targets only the female members of staff of child-bearing age.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. A review carried out in 2011 indicated that the Association would be unable to meet its financial commitments as they arose by the second half of 2012. All staff were then given twelve months notice that paid maternity leave would be suspended as of from January 2013.
2. Once the Association's finances recover sufficiently, paid maternity leave will be reintroduced for members of staff.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court was brought under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 and concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of one named worker for the application of a maternity leave payment scheme to her. The scheme, which had been in existence, was withdrawn in January 2013 as part of a major cost-cutting exercise when the Organisation was faced with severe reductions in funding.
The Claimant sought application of the maternity leave payment scheme when she was expecting her baby in April 2014, however, her request was refused as the scheme no longer applied.
At the hearing before the Court requested additional information from the Employer, however, this information was not furnished to the Court.
The Court accepts that the Employer was faced with severe financial difficulties which required rigorous action to ensure the sustainability of the Organisation. However, the Court also notes that the Claimant’s terms and conditions of employment, entered into in 2000, include a provision for paid maternity leave benefit.
In all the circumstances of this case the Court accepts that the Claimant’s conditions of employment entitled her to be paid for the period of her maternity leave incurred in 2014 and in those circumstances the Court recommends that she should be reimbursed with payment for that period of maternity leave.
The Court so Recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
23rd December, 2014______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.