FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MONDELEZ (CADBURY'S) - AND - TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Reduction in number of electricans employed & other company change proposals
BACKGROUND:
2. BACKGROUND:
This dispute concerns the reduction in the numbers of electricians employed and other proposed company changes. 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 26th August, 2015, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 9th October, 2015.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union says that there is not a skills deficiency within the electrical group and argue that there is not the need for such a reduction in numbers in their group.
2. The Union says it's unreasonable to suggest that they haven't engaged in a meaningful way as they say that they have met 3 times under the auspices of the LRC.
3. The Union is seekingto retain more than 7 of its current 23 electricians.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company is open to changed ways of working for Electricians and Fitters and suggests an upskilling programme for both that would result in much greater levels of task sharing.
2. The Employer says that there hasn't been meaningful engagement and that the only topic that has been discussed is the headcount. It says that the dispute should be resolved by having meaningful negotiations on all the proposed changes.
3.The Employer says that savings are absolutely necessary and that it is only looking to retain 7 of its current electricians.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having given careful consideration to the submissions of both parties to this dispute the Court recommends that the parties, over a period of four weeks, engage without pre conditions, in intensive discussions with a view to reaching agreement on all outstanding issues under the auspices of the LRC. Any issues that remain outstanding between the parties at the end of that engagement should be referred back to the Court for a definitive recommendation.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
19th October, 2015______________________
CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.