FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : AN POST - AND - GROUP OF WORKERS (REPRESENTED BY BYRNE CAROLAN CUNNINGHAM SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Breach of Collection and Delivery Work Practice Change Agreement between An Post and the Communications Workers' Union
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between the workers and An Post in relation to an alleged breach of a Company /Union Agreement. The matter was referred to the Labour Court on the 30th October 2014 in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The workers agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on 25th February 2015. The following is the Courts Recommendation:
WORKER'S ARGUMENT:
3 1 The workers contend that Management has breached the terms of the Collection and Delivery Work Practice Change Agreement in relation to the assimilation of staff on to the seniority list following redeployment from another office. The workers are seeking that Management correctly apply the terms of the Agreement and compensate the workers for the distress caused.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENT:
4 1 This issue is one of interpretation of a collective agreement. The Labour Court has previously recommended that issues such as these be referred to the Monitoring Group set up as a result of Labour Court Recommendation LCR18260. It is agreed between the parties that the Monitoring Groups findings will be binding on both parties.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court was brought under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 and concerns a claim by fourteen named workers that the Company was in breach of a collective agreement. The agreement “Collection and Delivery Work Practice Change Agreement between An Post and Communications Worker’s Union, dated 16thJanuary 2006, at 2.5.1. states:-
- “In respect of the interpretation or application of this Agreement or any subsection of the Agreement, any disagreement that arises which is not immediately resolved locally will be referred directly to Headquarters level, and failing resolution within five working days at that level to the Labour Relations Commission and to the Labour Court if necessary. The decision of the Court shall be binding on both Parties for the duration of the Agreement”.
The 2006 collective agreement is between two parties, An Post and Communications Worker’s Union (the Union), the workers in this case were not represented by the Union, therefore the Court was prohibited by the terms of the Agreement from giving its interpretation on the Agreement or its application to the workers concerned when only one party to the Agreement was before it.
Accordingly, the Court acknowledges and upholds the Agreement freely entered into by both parties and which continues to exist. Therefore, in the absence of the Union, the Court cannot process the claim before it.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
19th March 2015______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.