FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : LE CHEILE (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - 6 WORKERS (REPRESENTED BY FORSA) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Employer Implemented Pay Increase While In The Middle Of Procedures With The Union In The Matter
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the Employer and the Union on behalf of approximately 6 of its members. The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 17th December 2018 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 31st January, 2019.
The following is the Recommendation of the Court:
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union state their Members believe they 0have been treated very badly by the Employer.
2. The Union state no meaningful negotiation regarding pay has taken place since October 2016. The Employer has instead made unilateral decisions regarding pay.
3. The Union Members wish to engage with the Employer in meaningful discussions.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Employer states mediation and conciliation has been ongoing since 2017 regarding a pay claim.
2. The Employer states there is no collective agreement in place regarding pay negotiations.
3. The Union in this matter represents 6 Workers, which is a small percentage of the number of employees employed. The Employer stated the company has a pay policy in place which has been implemented for the past three years which applies to all staff, not just those represented by the Union.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has given very careful consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties.
It is clear that there is a culture of engagement between the parties as a general operating principle. It is also clear that the parties have demonstrated commitment to local engagement and referral through procedures as required in the course of addressing matters of dispute.
The matter before the Court arises from events which occurred during a process of engagement at the Workplace Relations Commission in relation to pay. The Court finds that, notwithstanding the parties’ willingness to engage, a misunderstanding has arisen and that has led to the within referral.
The Court recommends that the parties should reflect on the sequence of events and learn the lessons arising therefrom.
The Court so recommends
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
TH______________________
4 February 2019Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Therese Hickey, Court Secretary.