FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(2), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HENRY DENNY & SONS LTD (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - TWO WORKERS (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Hearing arising from LCR 21018.
BACKGROUND:
2. This case arose following a dispute between the Henry Denny & Sons Ltd and SIPTU regarding two workers who have a red-circled shift agreement. On the 20th January 2016 the Union and the Company jointly referred the dispute to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(2) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 5th April, 2016.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Claimants have fully co-operated with the amalgamation of both plants, have worked the new shift and embraced the changed working conditions with flexibility and co-operation.
2. Despite the significant change to the Claimants' terms and conditions of employment, redundancy was not an option for them.
3. In LCR21018 the Court recognised that staff that had red-circled conditions of employment may not have their concerns adequately accommodated in direct talks between the Company and the Union. It made provision for such workers to refer any outstanding issue(s) back to it for arbitration. The two workers in this claim are availing of that provision.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Claimants had an opportunity to avail of the voluntary redundancy programme.
2. A fair and equitable level of compensation has already been paid and therefore no further compensation is warranted in these cases.
3. The Claimants have enjoyed a three-cycle shift rate for fourteen years while working two-cycle shifts. It would be inequitable to compensate them further now that their shift cycle and rate have been aligned with general practice in the plant.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions of both parties to this dispute. The Court notes that the two Claimants have fully co-operated with the changes necessary to prevent the immediate closure of the plant. Those changes have adversely affected their terms and conditions of employment and have significantly departed from the 2002 “Red Circle” Agreement under which they were employed. The Court in Recommendation LCR21018 anticipated that such change may be required as part of the restructuring process and made express provision for any such affected parties to refer outstanding issues back to it for a definitive decision. In that context the case came before the Court. Also in that context the case is sui generis and does not constitute a precedent for any issues that may arise in this plant or elsewhere in industry in the future.
Taking into account the fact that this is the single outstanding item between the parties arising out of the restructuring of the business the Court finds merit in the Union’s claim and recommends that in consideration of the two Claimants' full co-operation with the restructuring the Company pay each of them compensation in the sum of €5,000 in full and final settlement of all matters arising out of the restructuring process.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
CO'R______________________
31 May, 2016Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Clodagh O'Reilly, Court Secretary.