FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : SHANNON HERITAGE DAC - AND - A WORKER REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Connolly Worker Member: Ms Treacy |
1. Pay increase for 20 workers employed at Malahide Castle and Gardens.
BACKGROUND:
2. Shannon Heritage is part of the semi-state Shannon Heritage DAC. In 2015 Shannon Heritage expanded its portfolio of tourism sites to include Malahide Castle and Gardens which had previously been run by Fingal Council.
The dispute concerns a claim for a pay-increase of 5% for 20 Shannon Heritage staff working at this site.
This claim was the subject of a trade dispute under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission on the 20th of December 2018.
As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 2nd of January 2019 in accordance with Section 26(1)(a)(b) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 7th of March 2019.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The Union maintains that historically the Malahide Castle and Gardens workers were and remain a stand-alone group within the company and added that Malahide is a very successful profitable entity.
2. The Union also states that pay structures are different from other parts of Shannon Heritage DAC.
3. The Union was not prepared to extend discussions beyond those members in Malahide Castle and consequently no real engagement took place at conciliation.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The Company argued that to negotiate with separate groups of employees represented by the same trade union would lead to a challenging industrial relations environment.
2. The Company is not prepared to engage in discussions in isolation of the overall pay situation for all staff in the group.
RECOMMENDATION:
The claim before the Court made by the Union on behalf of employees of the Company based at Malahide Castle and Gardens. The Union sought an increase in pay of 5% from 1st June 2018. The Company stated that its business comprised of a number of heritage sites based in different parts of the county, employing up to 236 WTE’s.
It submitted that it was willing to engage with the Union on pay issues, however, as there is one payroll for all sites, it was not prepared to negotiate with the Union in respect of the Malahide site only.
The Court has considered the submission made by both parties and having regard to the broader dimension, it recommends that the parties should engage at national level on an agenda to explore pay increases for staff employed at Shannon Heritage DAC, including those employed at Malahide Castle and Gardens.
The Court so Recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
14th March 2019
CH______________________
Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Carol Hennessy, Court Secretary.