FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : ST JOHN BOSCO YOUTH CENTRE - AND - UNITE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Enhanced Redundancy
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a claim by the Union for enhanced redundancy terms. The Union is seeking enhanced terms of 3.5 weeks per year of service which it claims is the agreed level of redundancy terms in analogous employments. The Union referred the dispute to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on 14th May 2015.
The Employer was notified of the time and date of the hearing but did not attend and was not represented.
UNION'S ARGUMENT:
3 1 The enhanced redundancy terms being sought by the Union are the terms that have been previously applied in analogous circumstances and as recommended on by the Labour Court in previous circumstances. The Union contends that its claim is reasonable and should be conceded.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issue before the Court is a claim for enhanced redundancy payments submitted by the Union on behalf of its members who were made redundant in Jan 2015. The Claimants were employed by the St John Bosco Youth Centre in various capacities under a Local Training Initiative. Due to the discontinuation of the Scheme by its sole funder, CDETB the Centre found it necessary to make the Claimants redundant. The Union sought an enhanced redundancy payment on behalf of the Claimants in line with precedents in the sector. The Claimants accept that the Employer does not have the funds to pay an ex-gratia redundancy payment. They argue that the funder should meet the cost of the enhanced payment claimed.
Having considered the oral and written submissions presented to it, the Court recommends that an ex-gratia payment of three weeks' pay per year of service in addition to statutory redundancy entitlements should now be paid to the Claimants. The Court notes that due to the financial circumstances of the organisation it does not have the funds to pay this amount out of its own resources and therefore the Court recommends that the parties should jointly cooperate in seeking the necessary funds from the funding agency to discharge the amount recommended.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
11th June 2015______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.