ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00004411

Complaint(s)/Dispute(s) for Resolution:

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 14/12/2016

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 [and/or Section 8(1B) of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977, and/or Section 9 of the Protection of Employees (Employers’ Insolvency) Act, 1984, and/or Section 79 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998, and/or Section 25 of the Equal Status Act, 2000] following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s). 

Preliminary Matters 

The respondent submitted that the contractual right to make such a change is conceded by the claimant;

The claimant along with others accepted the changes and the enhancements offered by the respondent;

The claimant raised no individual grievance with regard to the matters complained of;

Background

The Claimant is employed by the respondent on the 16th September 1996, as part of his contract of employment he was required to partake in the respondents DB scheme. An s a percentage of salaries the DB contribution from the respondent has increased from 5% in 2008 to 11.3% in 2014. Without these increases from the respondent, the fund would have been in significant difficulty. It was submitted that if the respondent had not made the decision to close the scheme to future accrual, the increase would have been significant in 2017.The Trustees wrote to the respondent to request an increase in contributions to 11.3% of salary which the respondent agreed to while reviewing the scheme. Details of various meetings and extensive communications including presentations from pension experts. An update meeting with the employee forum on the 27th May 2016 where a number of options were considered including a “cash option for payment of a gesture via payroll or the tax-free payment into the pension. It was submitted that up to 74% of employee took the cash option. This was availed of by the claimant to the tune of €7075.00

The claimant for his part stated that he had a contract of employment which included a DB scheme and the employee Forum had no authorisation to be involved in this process. It was also submitted on his behalf that he was going to lose out financially as he did not have the time to make up for the losses.

Findings

Both parties made extensive written and oral submissions at the hearing

I find that the issue involves a” Body of Workers” and

Section 13 of Industrial Relations Acts 1969

(2) Subject to the provisions of this section, where a trade dispute (other than a dispute connected with rates of pay of, hours or times of work of, or annual holidays of, a body of workers) exists or is apprehended and involves workers within the meaning of Part VI of the Principal Act, a party to the dispute may refer it to a rights commissioner.

Decision:

Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

I find that I have no jurisdiction to hear it.

Dated:   20^th February 2017