FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ROBERT ROBERTS LIMITED - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION MANDATE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Issue relating to redundancy terms.
BACKGROUND:
2. This concerns a dispute between Mandate and SIPTU Trade Unions and Robert Roberts Limited. 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 5th December 2014, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 21st January, 2015.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Roberts Roberts Ltd. is and continues to be a profitable company and can afford to pay an uncapped redundancy package to those who may choose to accept a voluntary package. It is part of multinational conglomerate whose profits have increased year on year. Capacity to pay is not an issue in this case.
2. The package offered by the Company does nothing to compensate those employees who have served the Company over a long number of years.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company has explored a wide range of options regarding the future structure of its operations in order to ensure its long term viability.
2. The redundancy terms offered were the company's standard terms which were last applied by the company without any disagreement or dispute in February 2009 during a reorganisation of the sales and marketing functions within its wine division.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has given careful consideration to the extensive written and oral submissions of both sides in this dispute.
On the basis of the evidence presented the Court finds that the Company should bring the severance terms offered in this case into line with collectively bargained precedents agreed with the Unions involved in this claim. Accordingly the Court recommends that, in full and final settlement of the claim, the Company’s should remove the cap on the offer of 5.25 weeks' pay inclusive of statutory redundancy per year of service.
The Court further finds that as this is a voluntary severance offer it is a matter for each worker to decide if they wish to apply to participate in the scheme and a matter entirely at the discretion of the Company whether it accepts or rejects any such application.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
CO'R______________________
28th January, 2015Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Clodagh O'Reilly, Court Secretary.