FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : TIPPERARY HOSTEL LTD - AND - SEAN TOOMEY (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. A claim for enhanced redundancy.
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a claim for enhanced redundancy for a former Worker of Tipperary Hostel Limited.
- The Union is seeking an enhanced redundancy package of three weeks’ pay per year of service in addition to the statutory entitlement.
- The Employer said the Company conceded liability for the payment of statutory lump sum payment under the Redundancy Payments Act at the Employment Appeals Tribunal but did not have the capacity to pay the lump sum figure. This was paid out of the Social Insurance Fund.
On the 29th September 2015 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 the 1st March 2016.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Tipperary Hostel Limited was initially set up as the sponsoring body for the Job Initiative Scheme. Funding for this programme was divided into 2 streams in that FÁS provided funding for the cost of labour while Pobal provided the necessary funds for materials and equipment.
2. In May 2010, the Worker was advised that the project was being closed on the basis that Pobal had decided to discontinue the funding of the project and that all staff were to lose their jobs.
3. This claim for an enhanced redundancy of three weeks’ plus statutory, represented the norm for Job Initiative Workers whose positions had become redundant.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company was formed by the local community with the intention that it would operate on a commercial basis once the redevelopment of the property was completed. This never came to fruition.
2. The Company has never traded commercially and has never been in funds other than by way of grants provided to facilitate the redevelopment of the former Workhouse.
3. The Company surrendered its interest in the lease to Tipperary County Council in July 2015. The Company believes that there is unlikely to be any improvement in its financial position that would enable it to proceed with the project or to provide further redundancy payments to the Claimant.
RECOMMENDATION:
Position of the parties
The Claimant
The Trade Union states that the claimant’s employment was terminated in 2010. That termination was subsequently, in 2012, acknowledged to have been by way of Redundancy. The Claimant has already received his statutory entitlement in respect of his redundancy. The Trade Union seeks payment of three week’s pay per year of service in addition to the statutory entitlement.
The Respondent
The Respondent states that it relied during its period of operation on FÁS for the labour element of its costs and on POBAL for cost of materials etc. The respondent states that it has no funds to meet the claim of the Trade Union side.
Recommendation
The issue before the Court is a claim for enhanced redundancy payments for the Claimant who was made redundant in 2010. The Court is advised that due to the discontinuation of funding of the labour element of its costs by its funder, FÁS, the Respondent had no alternative but to make the Claimant redundant. The Respondent stated to the Court that it had no funds to pay an ex-gratia redundancy payment.
Having considered the oral and written submissions of both parties, the Court recommends that an ex-gratia payment of three weeks' pay per year of service over and above the statutory redundancy payment already paid, should now be paid to the Claimant. 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.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
CR______________________
16th March, 2016.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.